Skip to main content

Full text of "A Plea for the Received Greek Text: And for the Authorized Version of the ..."

See other formats

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project 
to make the world's books discoverable online. 

It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject 
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books 
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover. 

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the 
publisher to a library and finally to you. 

Usage guidelines 

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the 
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to 
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying. 

We also ask that you: 

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for 
personal, non-commercial purposes. 

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine 
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the 
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help. 

+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find 
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it. 

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just 
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other 
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of 
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner 
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe. 

About Google Book Search 

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers 
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web 

at |http : //books . google . com/ 


L I It K .4 R T 

'•I IMV: 

Divinity School, 

Kkckivkii Nov. i.^.'t^ 




A. ^T" ' 





C&e iSeto Cestament, 










28 Castis St Leieester Sq 


To hear some people talk, one really would think 
wisdom and knowledge had come with them into 
the world ; until, whether from conceit on their 
part or from their " scientific " discoveries, we 
shall soon have nothing left either of the old 
world or of our old faith. Once, indeed, even 
heathens, Ik Atoc vixovro, claimed their descent 
from Heaven — for, said they, row yap kol ylvoc 
efTfiiiv, we are his kin ; though Christians now 
derive it from brutes ; while language, which of 
old was, in theory, said to be Trpo^opiKog \6yo^, 
' outspoken reason,' in token of its divine origin, 
is now discovered practically to be nothing but 
the development of the two mighty roots Bau- 
Wau, which in time overspread the earth. Such 
profound lore cannot, of course, be gainsaid ; but 
everything, from the creation of the world and 
of man, to the laws of etymology and the rules of 
syntax, is now settled accordingly. 


No wonder, then, if, under such circomstancesy 
both the Receiyed Ghreek Text and the Authorised 
English Version of the New Testament — ^monu* 
ments of learning of the past — should lately have 
had a hard life of it. The Greek Text especially ; 
because, being read by comparatively few, any 
one who takes into his head ''to construct^' a 
text, may try his hand at it with a certain 
degree of impimity ; so that, as things are at pre- 
sent, we have almost as many texts as there are 
critics ; to the great hindranciB and confusion of 
us all. Perhaps is it that '' to construct a text," 
after the manner of some men, is on the whole 
easier than to study and explain the one already 
existing, which, for the last two or three him- 
dred years, has been l^oSiov iv iravrl xpovc^ rrig 
K^rig,^ the provision by the way and trusty guide 
of thousands on their life-long journey to hea- 

The handling of the Authorised Version, how- 
ever, is not so readily done as " the construction" 
of a Greek text. Written as the English BiUe 
is, in a style especially chaste and vigorous, that 
blends Saxon manliness with cadence and melody, 
* S. Cyril of Jerusalem, Oatech. v. 


in greater harmony, perhaps, than any other 
EngKsh book written before or since — it first 
formed the language of the nation, and then 
struck root so deep in the affections of those who 
love truth and know the sterling worth of their 
mother-tongue, that alterations in it, by whomso- 
ever made, will not so soon be borne. 

Not that it is perfect. It only is the best of 
modem versions and inferior to none of the old 
ones ; so that the few blemishes it has, no more 
hurt its worth and usefulness, than do the spots 
on the sun the heat and light thereof; they 
trouble no one but those who make them an ex- 
cuse for a change. Yet, let those few blemishes 
remain rather than aQcept the ready services of 
eager Revisers, who, under the pretext of new 
discoveries — which, after all, amount to very, very 
little of any real utility — fain would, if they 
could, introduce a new Bible of their own ; that 
by so doing they might cut asunder one of the 
few remaining links of fellowship between men of 
the same nation, who yet are estranged one from 
another on all points but that of using the same 
Bible, and thus occasionally listening together to 
the same words. 


It is, no doubt, easy to talk of revising the 
Authorised Version. But, besides that in this 
case, as in most others, it is best to let well alone, 
the simple truth is that there are not now in 
England enough men able either to revise the 
English Bible without making mere patchwork 
of it, or to translate afresh and equally well from 
the originals. Revisers or translators, first, need 
be masters of Hebrew. But where are now-a- 
days in England the Hebrew scholars of the six- 
teenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries? 
Their works then written in Latin enlightened 
Europe, took the lead in European scholarship, 
and still are the treasure-house of knowledge to 
which all must come. But who would dream of 
looking here for aught of the kind, now that 
silks, lace, and embroidery, begin to take the 
place of Greek and Hebrew ; and that even 
the veteran scholar who represents Hyde, Po- 
cocke, and Lowth, is reduced to write in Roman 
characters the Hebrew of his learned Commen- 
tary, lest haply the sight of " strange alphabets," 
as the " Literary Churchman" calls anything but 
Latin and Greek, should offend the eyes of his 
readers P 


Next, Revisers of the English Bible should be 
imbued with solid Biblical lore ; with a few of 
the marvellous attainments in learning of some 
of their ancestors, in days, "when," to quote 
even the " Saturday Review," " England had 
scholars." Whereas, are not Biblical criticism 
and scholarship, confessedly at the lowest ebb at 
present, in this country, and, so far as they go, 
not much else than German teaching at second 
hand? Only compare what now passes for 
learning and scholarship — the Bible story-book 
about Abraham, king of Damascus, inventor of 
monotheism, being tempted of the Devil to offer 
up his son in sacrifice, &c., prepared by one Dean 
for the special use of the Clergy, with the kin- 
dred works of Selden, Spencer, and StilUngfleet, 
Marsham, Lardner, and Warburton ; or the 
mighty labours of Walton, Castell, Lightfoot, 
Mill, and others, on the Old and New Testa- 
ments, with the aimless criticisms on the same 
subject and borrowed learning of another Dean ; 
and then say whether, with all the boasting of 
to-day, the scholarship of yore was not more true, 
though with smaller means ; the research deeper 
and more honest, though with fewer resources ; 


and the lore altogether more solid and better 
worth having, than what is now offered under the 
same name P 

Then, thirdly, ought Revisers of the Autho- 
rised Version to know grammar — "the Dean's 
English" will not do — and, assuredly, to have 
studied, not the English dialect of to-day, but 
the English language of old ; the peerless tongue 
of Shakspeare, Hooker, Milton, and of other ori- 
ginal sons of the soil. 

Since, however, none of these requirements 
are at present available, let the Old Bible by all 
means remain as it is. Let the old garment be, 
which, if a little faded perhaps, after having 
stood in the light of two centuries and a half, is 
yet as good and as warm as when first woven; 
for the warp of it is as taut, and the woof as 
tight, the nap as soft .and thick as when cut off 
the weaver's thrums two hundred and fifty 
years ago. Let it then abide as it is, rather 
than pieced with patches of newer weft put on 
by modern Revisers; lest in the end, the rent 
be made worse, and all their labour in darning 
be lost. 

But, says the Dean of Canterbury, in one of 


his late articles on the subject/ the English Bible 
must be revised, in spite of all that is said to the 
contrary ; and the day for it is not far distant. 
If so, then by whom ? Will the Dean himself 
undertake the Hebrew of the Old Testament, or 
even the Greek or the English of the New? 
He must know something about it, and he has a 
right to speak ; for he has done more to it, as the 
saying is, than any living Englishman ; since he 
first " constructed " a Greek Text, and then re- 
vised thereon the English version ; with what 
feelings, however, may best be seen from his 
"New Testament for English Readers;" while 
he leaves us no doubt of his utter contempt for 
the Received Text, when saying that — 

" Lachmann s great merit and the real service he 
rendered to the cause of sacred criticism has been the 
bold and uncompromising demolition of that unworthy 
and pedantic reverence for the Received Text, which 
stood in the way of all chance of discovering the 
genuine Word of God." 2 

Such frothy writing says, of course, very little; 
for, had we then no " genuine Word of God," 

* Contemp. Eeview for July. 
* Proleg. to the fifth ed. of the Greek Test. p. 76. 


until Drs. Alford and Lachmann arose to dis- 
cover it ? Yet is such language offensive enough 
towards those who, with a reverence neither " pe- 
dantic '' nor " unworthy/' have all along trusted 
the Received Text, and loved the English Bible, 
to justify them in examining Dr. Alford's quali- 
fications as critic, and in questioning his right to 
give so rash and so sweeping a judgment. What, 
if many of his criticisms and his knowledge of 
Greek and of English grammar proved such as 
to shake all confidence in him as a guide ; while 
his quotations from the Old Versions lead one to 
doubt his acquaintance with any of them P 

As one, therefore, of the numerous class of 
Clergy for whom Dr. Alford kindly undertook 
" to construct" a new Text, and in behalf of them, 
— of men, who, hard at work in their country 
parishes, never see a library, and study as best 
they may, their two main-stays, the Received 
Text and the Authorised Version — must I ven- 
ture to make a few remarks on certain points of 
his teaching, both Greek and English, which are 
not quite clear to me. They will serve as a 
sample of what his whole work probably is ; and 
may thus tend to re-assure many who, too busy 


perhaps, or unable to study the matter for them- 
selves, might, on the Dean's authority, and, at 
the sight of the fearful array of ciphers and 
symbols of his "digest," take for granted that 
the Received Text they trust, and to which they 
have been accustomed, is utterly worthless ; and 
that the English Bible they love and venerate is 
not much better. And thus, by losing confidence 
in both, unsettle their minds and shake their 
faith. All of which, God, in His mercy, forbid. 

S. C. Malan. 

Torquay, Nov. 26, 1868. 


At page 47, line 8, fur <* be his," feed '* to be bis/' 
„ 58, „ 2, fwr «* he may," rtod " maybe." 
„ 84» „ 20, for " makes," read " make," 





Passing over a few trifling matters in the first 
seventeen verses of this chapter, we come to Dr. 
Alford's reading of v. 18. 

fov §€ 'Ijjerou 77 yivemg ovrtjg ijv, on whicli he 
says, in his digest, that 

" yivvrjmg of the Received Text, which is a probable 
correction from the verb so often used before^ occurs in 
L. and the rest," 

He then gives us his authorities for the change: — 

"BCPSZA, 1 syr. Ath. Eus. Dial-trin. ex- 
pressly ;" 

and adds in his notes that — 

" yeveiTig must be understood in a wide sense, as 
nearly identical in meaning with yiyyrjmQ ; &s=i^or{go,' 



not merely * birth,' " Mey. It probably is chosen by the 
Holy Spirit to mark a slight distinction [1] between 
the yivvriffiQ of our Lord and that of ordinary men. 
See Schol. in digest.'* 

I. Before examining Dr. Alford^s authorities, 
let me say one word on the relative meaning of 
yivvri(Tig and yivetrig, which are not seldom con- 
fused by careless Greek writers; Doubtless, ac- 
1 cording to the scholiast quoted by the Dean, both 
terms are said cv oeriorirn slg Xpitnov, somewhat 
as " birth," " origin," and " pedigree," may be 
said of the same person ; though assuredly not in 
the same sense. Yet, inasmuch as these terms 
are not applicable to Christ in the same way as 
they are to every one of us, the fact that Origen, 
who is supposed to be that scholiast, uses almost 
exclusively one of those terms, is assuredly not 
an absolute authority in favour of it ; for, in 
many things, he is not a very safe guide. Let us, 
then, look at these terips, yivttrig and yivvriaig, 
and judge of them on their own merits. 

(1.) As yivvvi(Tig comes from yevv^cii, and 
yevvq, avrjp ndiSa,^ it is said of the actual procre- 
ation of children, as being (1) begotten by the 
father (y^vvriTWf), yevvrirrig 6 irarrip^), and (2) 
borne and brought forth by the mother (a/u^orl- 
pwv y^vvTiaavrwv^) ; in which sense yivvrtatg is 
used by Plato, when he speaks of ai rwv TrafSwv 

» Thorn. Mag. s. v. p. 78. " lb. p. 308. 

3 Arist. ^-ffJ i. y«y. i. 17, 4, ed. Oxf, 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. . 3 

yivvfi(T£iiQ Kai rpoipaU When, however, he speaks 
of rrjg yevvriaawg kol tov tokov,^ he limits yivvri<rig 
to the father; for rlKreiv Kvp(<og IttI yyyaiKa, to 
Si ysvvqv €7rt avSpa ; ^ wherefore vapOivog rtKrei 
— ri^erai to iv avrg yevvridiv^ likewise Aristotle, 
TO appev fiiv sivai to SvvafJLSvov yBvv^v elg erc- 
/oov— TO Se OrjXv to dg avTO.^ So that albeit yevv^v 
be sometimes used for the actual " bringing 
forth *' (yevv^v ovaag driXetag — Sea yap [Z^o,"] i% 
avTtJv yevvq, rlXcm rj t^d^a rj cfa),^ yet the primary 
idea of yevv^v, yivvri<ng, belongs to the father ; 
and these terms are never said of the mother, 
except as implying the part taken by the father 
in the reproduction of her offspring.^ Whereas — 
(2.) riveaig, from (inus. yivw) ylvofiai, is a 
generic term, KaOoXiKti Xi^ig,^ rj awXwg Xlyerae,^ 
which is said absolutely of production or origin 
of any kind ; as yiv. voTa/Jiiov, Kotxfxov, &c. It is 
said by S. Clement Al. to be twofold, Sirrrj yap r\ 
yiveaig;^^ (b), of reproduction {ytvvwfJLiv(M)v)j and 
(2), of mere results (yivo/ulvciw). Viveaig, then, 
is a generic term for " coming into being " — 
oTav p^v yap elg aladnrriv jiBTafiaXXy vXtiv, ytvsar- 

> Be Legib. I. 6, p, 440, ed. Lond. 

* Conviv. 31, p. 89. » Thorn. Mag. s. v. p. 358. 

* S. Matt. i. 20, 23. S. Athan. De Inc. V. D. vol. i. pp. 88, 
593, &c, 

» «-ieJ {. yi». I. 2, 4. « Ibid. HI. 5, 5, 10, 11, &c, 

^ Justin. M. Dial. c. Tiyph. pp. 310, 312. 

8 Enthym. Zig. ad loc. and A. Bynsei de Nat. J. G. p. 165. 

* Arist ri^} yn, ». ^t. I. 3, 14. 
w Strom. IV. p. 585. 


Oai tj^amv^ — and includes all special modes of 
production, reproduction, or origin, without de- 
fining the process of any. 

Thus, yivemg is said (1) of the waters of the 
Ocean, as origin of all things;* (2), of " the origin 
of the world ; (3), beings ; (4), natures ; (5), an- 
gels ; (6), powers ; (7), souls ; (8), commandments ; 
(9^, laws ; (10), of the Gospel ; (11), of the know- 
ledge of God;''* (12), of the procreation of chil- 
dren, said absolutely, as origin of the human 
body — (TWfiarog, aapKog yiveorig — yiveaig avOpwirov 
— (rapKiKTi yiviaig, ^ rrig fxriTpag irapaSoxfi (row 
yevvirriKOv <nr,) rriv yiveaiv 6/JLo\oyu^ — without in 
any way alluding to the part each agent takes in 
it. It is also said absolutely by S. Athanasius, 
when he asks, who ever Ik irapBivov /lovijc t^X^ 
TTjv Tox) (rdjfJLaTog yiveaiv,^ and by S. Clement Al. 
where he speaks of top Trjg yevlaewg /i£r«Xj?0ora 
Kvpiov — Kttt rfiv yevvritratrav irapOivovJ Tivemg, 
then, is said (13) of a genealogy or pedigree, and 
(14) Ka0oXiKi7 Xl^iC oiaa, <Tr\iiaivH kcu rfiv yivvri- 
(Ttv,® being a generic term, it also implies " birth," 
yivvr\(ng, and is used for it, but, of course, incor- 
rectly. For accurate writers do not take the one 
term for the other : witness Plato — r\ Kvrimg icai 

» Arist. ibid. I. 3, 18. « H. f . 245. 

* S. Clem. Al. Strom. IV. p. 470. 

* S. Athan. De Inc. V. D. toI. i. p. 637. 

* S. Clem. Al. Psedag. II. p. 188. Strom, iii. p. 461. 
« De Inc. V. D. vol. i. 88, 637. 

' Strom. III. p. 469. • Euthym. Zigab. in Matt i. 1. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 5 

Yi yivvtiaig. 'ElXelOvia 1} KaWovfi core ry yeviaei ; * 
because, whereas yevimg simply tells of origin or 
production, yivvtiartg in good authors always im- 
plies the part of the father, row ysvvriTOpog Trarpog, 
(yEvvijora/ufvoc /titv ttIvtc y^viareig^ — yiveaig Sc ev 

II. From all this, it is evident that yiveaig 
and yivvriaig cannot be said indiscriminately of 
Christ, riveartg may be said of Him, as in (iifiXog 
yEviaewg, without being misunderstood ; because 
there it is limited to Kara trapica — wg av rig iliroi 
/3f j3Xoc yeveaXoyiag,* to his genealogy from Abra- 
ham to Joseph and Mary. But if said, without 
qualification, of His Incarnation, as yivemg means 
"origin*' in general, it then becomes a wrong 
expression ; since the Son has no " origia," but is 
one with the Father from all eternity ; of whom 
He was begotten before all worlds. 

Wherefore do we hear of no yiveaig in this case, 
neither can He be yeyevtifiivog ; but 6 tov Gcou 
X070C Svo yevvriaeig exct, fiiav fiev Ik rov 0£oO koi 
iraTpbg, ring kol Trpwrij yivvr\(ng XiyeraC icai kripav 
Ik Tr^g aapKog, ^ig kol Ssvripa yivvriaig Xiyerai,^ 
* the Word of God has two procreations ; the one 
of God the Father, which is the first ; and the 
other of the flesh, which is called the second ;' 
that is, begotten of the Father and bom of the 

* Conviv. 31, vol. ii. p. 79. 

* Critias, 8, p. 389. » Arist. ArigJ {. ytw, I. 22, 1. 

* Theophan. Cer. Horn. xiv. 

" Quffist. in S. Athan. vol. ii. p. 441. 


Virgin Mary. Tlarfip ^v, koX Ylog iyewfiOn- M^ 
uwyg, wore ; aXka rrapaSpafu to hrupwrr^fia. M^ 
hriZttrriifr^^y Tiw^ ; aSvvaroc yap r\ awoKpurig^ 
* The Father existed, and the Son was begotten. 
Say not, When ? but avoid the question^ Nei- 
ther inquire, How P for it is impossible to answer 
thee.' 'O yap ysvvnOeig avtoOev Ik warpog Xoyoc, 
apprrriaig^ atppaarrwc, aKaraX-ftnTw^, aiSlwg, iv ypovi^ 
ysvvarai KarwOev Ik wapOivov Mapiag ; * ' for the 
Word of God who was begotten on high, ineffably, 
inexplicably, incomprehensibly, eternally, in time 
was bofn of the Virgin Mary.' 

III. So then, whereas the orthodox yiwrimg 
said of our Lord Christ, is liable to no mistake, 
we cannot wonder at the term yivtmg, when said 
of Him, haying given birth to various errors and 
heresies. S. Athanasius alludes to this when he 
says : EiTrare rolvvv, irtjg Xiyere Gebv iv Na^a/Dlr 
yeyevriarOai, rfjc OcorijTOc i>g €Lp)(rjv yeviaewg airay^ 
ylXXovrec Kara IlauXov rov 'Sia/JLoararia, rj rijc 
aapKog rfiv yiveaiv apvoiffievoi Kara Ma/9icfciiva, KaX 
rohg aXXouc aiperiKoifg, ov rc(» evayyektK(^ erroc- 
^ovvreg opt^ aXX' Ik rdjv liiwv XaiXeiv OiXovreg ; — 
Ov yap apxvv yevi(TBwg Ik ^aZaplr 6 Qebg iTrcScfK- 
vvrai, aXX 6 vTrapxtov npo rC^v alwvwv Xoyog 
0€oc, Ik Na^a/Dtr avOptoirog e&00t}, yivwiOeig Ik 
Mapiag rrig napOivov Ka\ Uvevfiarog 'Aytov Iv 
BeOXelfi rrjg 'lovSafac Ik (rrripfxarog Aa6t8 koL 

' Homil. in Sanct. Ghr. Gener. S. Basil. 0pp. vol. iii. col. 
1167,ed. M. 

* S. Athanas. De H. Nat. vol. i. p. 599. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 7 

Afipaafu^ *Tell me, then, how do you say that 
God was bom at Nazareth, making that the 
origin of the Godhead, according to Paul of Sa- 
mosata, or denying the origin of His flesh, like 
Marcion and the other heretics; giving, all of you, 
your own conceits, and not keeping to the line 
marked out by the Gospel? For God does not 
show the beginning of His existence from Na- 
zareth, but God the Word, who existed from all 
eternity, appeared as man out of Nazareth, being 
bom of the Virgin Mary and the Holy Ghost in 
Bethlehem of Judah, of the seed of David, of 
Abraham, and of Adam, as it is written.' 

IV. Further examples are needless, in order 
to show that when the generic yivectig, " origin," 
is said of One who has none, but who, being, ne* 
vertheless, also " born of a woman," had a birth 
into this world, ylwijertc is assuredly the most 
appropriate term to use for that event. For, with 
the mention of the Holy Ghost, yivetrig here may 
mean that our Saviour was His Son, and not that 
of the Father, as Macedonius says, 'O Ylbg ovv 
itmv 6 ^Irjaovg tov irve6/uaroc ; ^ 'Is Jesus, then, the 
son of the Holy Ghost ?* as if taking His "origin" 
from Him ; whereas, the " birth," yivvrimCy being 
once told, the subsequent mention of the Holy 

» De Salut. adv. Ch. vol. i. p. 637. 

* Dial. III. de Trin. in S. Athan. vol. ii. p. 233* These 
Dialogues are by some ascribed to S. Maximus Confessor, who 
lived in the 6th century, and by others to Theodoritus, who 
was a disciple of S. Ghrysostom. For, as to these Dialogues 


Ghost as miraculous agent in it, is liable to no 
such misconstruction. 

Not only does S. Chrysostom only speak of 
yiwtimg in his first four homilies on S. Matthew, 
but, commenting on this yerse, which he reads, 
Tov I. X. ri yivvrimg, ovrwg ^v, he asks, Hoiav 
fioi yivvvimv Xiytig; drri fioi' Kairoiye rovg vpo^ 
yovovc s^irag. 'AXXa ^oiXofiai Koi tov Tp6irov rrig 
yevvfiaewg elveiv. *What birth? tell me, since thou 
hast just rehearsed his ancestors ; but I must also 
tell thee what manner of birth that was.' 

He then speaks of the Holy Ghost ov iirXaaev 
TOV vaov, as building the temple, i. e. the flesh of 
Christ in the Virgin's womb ; and uses through- 
out the term yiwrimg. Whereas, the author of 
the Dialogues on the Trinity, above alluded to, 
founds his reading, Tov 'I?j<roO, 81 1} yivetrig ovrwg 
ijv, which is one of Dr. Alford's authorities, on 

&Tl TOV Vabv TOV (TWfJLaTOg tov XplOTOV TO TTvev/JLa 

TO ayiov iKTifTsv, that the Holy Ghost created the 
temple of Christ's body ; explaining the operation 
of the Holy Ghost by — Kat yap koL 01 avOpwiroi 
TTpiOTOv yiyvofJLeOa dmfiiovpyiKiijg, the way in 
which we were first brought into being. While 
S. Chrysostom, whose opinion commends itself, 
says of the part acted by the Holy Ghost, " that 

being the work of S. Athanasius, not odIj does internal evi- 
dence prove the contrary, but Cave ranks them amoDg the 
spurious writings of this Father, adding, '^ ciguscunque sint, 
Athanasii non esse certo certius est." Hist. litt. vol. i. pp. 196 
and 687. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 9 

neither Gabriel nor S. Matthew could ^ay more 
than that — Ik irvev/JLaTog aylov yiyove to yeyevri- 
fiivov, what took place^ happened by virtue of the 
Holy Ghost ; but, ttwc Ik IIv. A., icai rlvi rpoirt^, 
ovSeig tovtwv ripfi-nvevarev — 'as to "how'' and "in 
what manner " the Holy Ghost wrought it, nei- 
ther the Angel nor the Evangelist have explained 
it to us.'* 

V. Reasoning d priori, therefore, we may sup- 
pose which of the two terms, yivemg or yivvriaig, 
S. Matthew would choose, in order to explain to 
his countrymen that He whom they knew as 
Jesus, and whom they thought to be the son of 
Joseph and Mary, was the Christ, descended, as 
He must be, from Abraham and David, and, 
though bom of a woman, yet supematurally con- 
ceived in her by the Holy Ghost. Not only does 
it seem natural that, having stated the ancestry 
— j3rj3Xoc yeviarewg — he should then come to the 
"birth," yivvritrig; and having told this, then 
to explain how it took place ; but the construe- 
tioii, of the Greek forces it upon us. No Greek 
scholar, no one who has an inkling of the lan- 
guage, can first read /3^/3Xoc yeviaetjjg, at v. 1, 
and then — tov SI ^Irjaov Xpiarov -q yivvrimg ovrwg 
^v, without being driven by the Sc, to turn his 
mind to what is coming ; and that, too, despite 
all the intervening Sc's in the genealogy. ^'Here 
is the book of the generation ; but now for the 

» Homil. IV. in Matt, fi', y\ 


birth and all tlie particulars." And so under- 
stand it — 

(a.) Didymus Alexandrinus (a.d. 370), who 
says : fivrifJLovtvriov ovv, &ri 8io rag aiptriKag aSo- 
Xeer^fac ylveaiv Trpoavira^ev Trig ivavOpuyjrficrBfog 
6 tvayyeXurrfig, elra yivvnmv^ 'We must bear in 
mind that, because of the fond conceits of here- 
tics, did the Evangelist place first the origin or 
descent, ylvemg, before the Incarnation, and then 
the birth, yivvnmg,^ 

{b,) S. Epiphanius, who speaking of jitjSXog 
yivsarewg I. X. viov A. v- 'A/3, says, elra iXOwv iir 
avrh TO ZirroifJLBvov, (pricri' tov 8I I. X. ri yivvvi<ng 
ovTfog ijv.® The Evangelist, after introducijig the 
genealogy of Jesus Christ, then comes to his ob- 
ject and says, tov 8I I. X. ri yivv. &c. * Now the 
birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise.* 

(c.) Theophanes: aTro ytveaXoylag ap\6iuvoL 
— ouroi Triv aylav tov Xpifrrov yivvriaiv viro\p6' 
fitOa,^ * Beginning with the genealogy, we will 
then consider the hallowed birth of Christ.' 

(d.) S. Irenseus. MaTOatog 8l t?)v Kara avBptO" 
TTOv aurov yivvriaiv KripirrH \iy<ov j3/j3Xoc yevi' 
(TBwg I. X. viov A. viov 'Aj3/t>aa/u.* ' That Matthew 
proclaims His birth as man, saying. The book of 
generation of Jesus Christ,* &c. 

(e,) S. Chrysostom takes yivamg and j3fj3Xoc 
yBvi<retog in the sense of yivviiaig throughout in 

» De Tiin. Lib. II. col. 672, ed. Mign. 

■ Adv. Hseres. lib. ii. vol. i. p. 426. • Homil, xiv. 

* Adv. Heeres. lib. iii. c. zi. p. 222, ed. Gr. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 11 

his Horn. I.-IV. on S. Matthew ; as we are re- 
minded by — 

(/.) Euthymius Zigabenns,* who, on (i((i\og 
y€vi(Ti(M)g, says that yiveaig evravOa, r^v yivvr\(nv 
Ivo^crcv 6 ')(pv<r6<TTOfjLog Iwavvrig ; and then says, 
avb) filv eiiTiv (MarOaToc) /3t/3Xoc yiveaetog — k&t(o 
Sf, Tov lijerov ')(pi<TTov, 0?|(riv, 17 yivvriarig ourwc ^v ; 
above, St. Matthew says, yiv^mg, and below, 
•ylvvijercc 5 8Jid at v. 18, " ovrwg" wc Aneiv fciXXet, 
fiyovv vTTOKeirai, " in this wise," that is, as he is 
goiQg to tell ; " as follows." Likewise — 

(g.) S. Athanasius: **You deny that Christ 
was made man, how then do you read the 
Gospels ? that of S. Matthew, for instance, which 
begins with (iifiXoc ysvianwg I. X. viov A. viov 
^AjipaafjL f while elsewhere S. Athanasius renders 
yiv£(T{g by yivvrimg, saying, Mar 6. rriv Kara av- 
Op(tnrov avTov ylvvri<riv — j3fj3Xoc 7€vI(T£wc> Xlyciiv.* 

(h,) Theophylact also* reads, j3//3Xoc ycvlercwc? 
TOV 81 'Iijtrov XpioTOv ri yivvr\(ng ovrtog ^v. 

I have not by me a copy of S. Cyril of Alex- 
andria, but Justin Martyr seems to have read 
yivvrimg in this verse when he speaks of yivvr\(nq 
fi Sta Trig trapOivov TjTig fiv inrb tov Aa/BiS Koi 
'Aj3/oaa/i yivovg.^ 

Those few examples will suffice to show that 

1 Enthym. Zig. vol. i. p. 17, 18, 35, ed. Matth. 

• De iDcam. Ch. vol. 1. p. 623. 

• De Interp. Par. SS.vol. ii. p. 400, if this treatise is of him. 

• In Matt, ad loc. 

» Diai. c. Trin. p. 327. 


the reading of the Received text, yivvrimg, in this 
18th verse is not so very bad, after all. 

VI. Let tis now examine Dr. AKord's autho- 
rities for condemning it. 

He gives us six M88., the Vatican, C. Ephraemi 
and Guelph, supposed to be of the fourth, fifth, 
and sixth centuries respectively. The last three 
are of the ninth and tenth centuries and later. 
The most valuable authority for yiveatg in this 
place, then, is that of the Cod. Vaticanus B., the 
date of which, however, is only " supposed " to 
be the fourth century ; but it may be later, for no 
one ever gives the latest probable date to MS8.,on 
the contrary, they are all made as old as possible. 

Against this we may set the older authorities 
already mentioned, SS. Chrysostom, Epiphanius, 
IrensDus, &c., and also one to which the Dean 
does not allude, namely, Didymus Alexandrinus, 
who reads, Tov 8l 'It|(tov X/otarou fi yivvri<ng ov- 
rwg ^v,* and who, as we saw above, dwells espe- 
cially on the fact that yivearig occurs in verse 1 
and yivvr}(Ttc in verse 18. Now, since it is clear 
(1) that heresies of various kinds were more 
easily fostered by yiveaig, as " origin " of Christ 
at that time, than by yivvrjaig, His " birth'* as 
man, and (2) that these two readings are on that 
account of a very ancient date, why not accuse 
the Cod. Vaticanus of some of the earlier here- 
sies, as the valuable and accurate Gothic version is 

^ > De Trinit. Hb. ii. col. 669, D. ed. M. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 13 

of Arianism P Seeing that yivvriaig is infinitely 
more orthodox — yevvrfOivra Ik tov irarpog^ — and 
theologically correct, as applicable to Christ, than 
yivearig ; His birth of the Virgin being, as Eulo- 
gius says, 17 ')Q:}oviKri yivvriaig Trig Oeiag avrov icai 
aiSiov yevvri<retjgy^ " but the birth in time of His 
divine and eternal issue from the Father.*' 

The authority of the other five uncial MS8. 
and of the cursive one is, of course, less than that 
of the Cod. Vat. ; albeit Cod. EphraBmi, said to 
be of the sixth century, may possibly suffer from 
what Mill in the Prolegomena* to his Greek Tes- 
tament calls " interpolatae lectiones," instancing 
this very one, yivetrig, as interpolated by Maximus 
in his Dialogue with Macedonius. 

VII. Then come "syr. Ath. Eus. Dial.-trin. 

As regards the Syriac, the Peschito, which is 
older, and carries more weight than the later Phi- 
loxenian, reads yiveaig {yilidutho) in verse 1 and 
yivvr\(ng (paldo, c. suff. yaMeh) in verse 18. All 
the editions I have of Widmanstadt, Schaaf, Tro- 
stius, &c., have this reading; and the Latin trans- 
lations attached to the last two render the Syriac 
by generatio in verse 1 and natimtas in verse 18. 
"Hie Polyglot, however, has, incorrectly, genera- 
tio at each verse for the two distinct Syriac terms. 
That the two terms are not identical is proved by 

» Symb. Nic. in S. Athan. vol. i p. 247. 
• In Photii Bibl. p. 763, ed. Kot. 
» 757 and 1021. ed. Rot. 1710. 


the term yaldo being used in S. Matt. xiv. for 
Herod's birth-day, upon which S. EphrsBm com- 
ments,^ and renders yaldo in this and in other 
places by maulodo, birth, partus, so that there can 
be no doubt that the transktors of the Peschito 
had before their eyes yivemg at verse 1 and 
yivvriorig at verse 18 ; and this, too, either at the 
end of the first or about the middle of the second 

Dr. Alford, therefore, cannot boast of much 
support from ancient versions, if he may not get 
that of the old Peschito, but must go to the 
Philoxenian for his Syriac authority in favour of 
yivifTig, For we see what both the Peschito and 
S. Ephraem say; but as to the '* revised '* Pes- 
chito by Philoxenus of Mabug and Thomas of 
Harkel, in the sixth century, like most other re- 
visions, it betrays- tokens of strange handling, 
and often is hardly readable by the side of its 
more venerable original* Here, for instance, it 

1 De Nat. Dom. Serm. Hi. iv. zi. &c. 

* Abulphar%j (Hist. Dyn. Arab. p. 300, ed Poo.) says that 
'* the Peschito or simple version was made in the days of Addens, 
who succeeded Thaddeus as Bishop of Edessa in the days of 
King Ahgarus, to whom Thaddeus was sent by Christ, or by 
Thomas. Some, however, say that this version was made in 
the time of Solomon and Hiram. [If this legend could be true, 
it would, of course, apply only to a few books of the Old T.] 
The Syrians, however, have another version, more figured and 
adorned in style [the Philoxenian], made from the Greek a long 
time after our Saviour's birth." 

In the ** Ancient Syriac Documents " (p. 14, 15, ed. Cur.), 
we read that the converts by Aggseus, who was consecrated 

ON S. MATT. CH. I, V. 18. 15 

renders yivetrig or yivvtitrie by a term which has 
nothing to do with either, namely, hwot/o, from 
hwo, " to be " nin, that means '* being " or " exist- 
ence;" also " factura, elementnm;" whereas both 
yivmiQ and yivvtitriQ come from the Aryan root 
gen or Jen, widely spread over East and West. One 
can hardly help suspecting that, somehow or other, 
the Syrian heretics of the Nestorian days had 
something to do with Philoxenus and his work. 

The next authority on the Dean's list is 
" Ath." which means Athanasius : but where does 
S. Athanasius quote this verse P Such loose re- 
ferences only puzzle the student and waste a deal 
of his precious time by referring him, if he be in 
earnest, to anywhere in one or two folio volumes ; 
but if he is not in earnest, and takes the Dean 
upon trust, much good will it do him to know 
?ind to repeat that " Ath." favours the reading ; 
though he cannot tell where. Such information, 
however, and such scholarship, would both be 

bishop by Thaddens, and ibrmerly Abgar's silk mercer, came to 
him and read in the " Old and New Testaments, and in the 
Prophets and the Acts of the Apostles." This, however, could 
be neither in ^reek nor Syriac in those days, as regcurds the 
New Testament. So that no great faith can be placed in the 
authenticity of these " Documents." But the same thing 
occurs in the Ethiopic and Coptic Apostolic Constitutions, in 
which the Apostles enjoin the reading of the Gospel that Was 
not written in their days; it is also found in the 8th para- 
graph of the Doctrine of the Apostles in Syriac, p. 27 of 
these " Documents." For full information on the Peschito see 
J. Wichelhaus, de N. T. Versione Syriaca Antiqua quam Pes- 
chito vocant, libri iv. 1850. 


worth very little, in good classical studies. Only 
compare the accuracy of notes by most of the real 
scholars of old. You at once lay your finger on 
the line, and learn to trust and thank them for 
their accurate and solid lore. Whereas a whole 
page of such digest as " Ath. Eus. Dial-Trin. Syr. 
Cyr. Orig. B C P A Z. a. /3. 7. 2, 3, 4, 7," &c., would 
be of very little use to the student, who must 
either give it up or learn it by heart, and after 
all really know nothing about the matter. 

I have spent considerable time in trying to 
discover the Dean's reference to S. Athanasius ; 
but in vain. Such expressions, indeed, as o-w/xaroc 
yivemQy^ trapKog yivemg,'^ said of Christ occur ; but 
they allude to the formation of His body in His 
mother's womb, and do not assuredly favour the 
Dean's reading, seeing the vast difierence there is 
between yiveaig, origin, or formation of Christ's 
body, and the yivecng, origin, formation of Him 
said absolutely, as implied in rov Se I.X. 17 yivztng 
ovTWQ ^v. This, we saw, was the heresy of Paul 
of Samosata, who held Geov Ik No^o/oer otpOivra, 
Koi evreifOev rriQ vTrap^ewg r?)v ap\fiv l<T\riK6Tay^ 
* that God was seen out of Nazareth, and that He 
thence took the beginning of His existence,' ac- 
cording to the Philoxenian version ; Gcov Iv No- 
^a/oer -yc'ycviJo'Ooi, Tr\q Oeorr^rog (og ap^fjv yeviaevjg 
airayyiWwv,^ reporting that God was bom at 

» De Incarn. V. Dei, vol. i. p. 89. • Id. p. 637. 

3 De Salut. Adv. J. Ch. S. Ath. vol. i. p. 635. * lb. p. 637. 

ON S. BiATT. CH. I. V. 18. 17 

Nazareth, as if the beginning of the Godhead 
dated from His yivaviQ, formation in the Virgin's 

That such is the sense of yivemg is further 
proved by this passage : rivog 8l rijc yevi<TBwg 
irpoiSpajULev aor?)/© iv ovpavoig^ koI tov yevvriOivra 
itrniuLave ry olKovfiivy :^ 'whose origin was preceded 
by a star in the heavens that marked Him out when 
born to the whole world :' words which favour the 
idea that the star appeared in the heavens at the 
descent of Gabriel from thence, and continued to 
shine as a heavenly witness over the develop- 
ment of the Word mude flesh in the Yirgin's 
womb; until, as a beacon, it brought the wise 
men to Jerusalem, and at last stood over the 
dwelling in which the young child was. I know 
not if the above passages are the ones meant by 
the Dean in " Ath.," if so, tov 2(iir?}|0oc yivatrigf 
found in S. Clement Al. ; - Trpotnrolrimc Trjg Ik 
irapdivov yevitrewg,^ said by Origen, who also 
speaks of the same Virgin as ry irpiwH yevv^v 
yivvrtfiay iif (J rexOivriy* &c., may, perhaps, 
answer the same purpose, though he does not 
mention them. 

VIII. Then comes " Eus." for Eusebius ; but 
where P ad Steph. P The only passage I can 
discover bearing directly upon this is in his 
Chronicon Arm. Lat., where the original Arme- 

» S. Ath. De Incam. V. D. p. 88. * Strom, i. p. 339, 840. 
» PhUocal. p. 30. * lb. p. 28. 



nian dznunt is rendered by yivvn<Tig in a parallel 
passage from Cedrenus given in a note.^ 

IX. Lastly, we haye "Dial-trin. express.," 
which means that the reading tov Si 'If|(r. ri ylv 
e<rig ovTwg Ifv is foond expressly in the third 
Dialogue of S. Maximus against Macedonius, 
generally printed among the writings of S. Atha- 
nasius ; but this authority is worth very little. 
(1.) S. Maximus flourished late in the sixth cen- 
tury, 200 years after SS. Chrysostom, Epiphanius, 
and Didymus Alexandrinus, who all give in so 
many words the other reading, tov 8J I.X. ri yiv- 
vri<Tig ovTwg ^v, as noticed above. (2.) The real 
author of this Dialogue is not known. (3.) Who- 
ever he be, he dwells on i^ yivBtrig elinv, oix* v 
yivvriaig,^ that S. Matthew said, "the genesis, 
making or forming," not the "birth" or gene- 
ration of Christ ; whereby, as we already noticed, 
he alluded to the temple of Christ's body being 
created by the Holy Ghost — to ay, UvavjULa Ik- 

But as to this formation by the Holy Ghost 
the Fathers held more than one opinion. S. 
Chrysostom,^ whose authority is always great, 
uses the term iirXatTev for the work of the Holy 
Ghost, and reads yivvri<nQ throughout. Justin 
Martyr, however, alludes to S. Luke's words, say- 
ing that SivafiiQ Oeov iweXOovaa rg wapOivt^ Ittc- 

* Vol. ii. p. 260 and 261 . * S. Athan. vol. ii. p. 233. 
• Homil. iii. iv. in Matt. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 19 

fTKlatrev aifrfjv' koi Kt;o^O|0i}(rae vapOivov ovtrav ttctto/- 
iiice :^ * the power of God coming upon the Virgin, 
overshadowed her, and made her be with child, 
being a virgin.' To irvtvfia ovv kol rfiv Svvafiiv 
Tr)V irapa rov Oeov ovSev aX\o vorifTai OifUQy ri rbv 
Aoyoi/, oc KOL vpwTOTOKog T(^ Getj) i(TTi :^ ' but we 
dare not call the Spirit and the power that is 
from God aught else than the Word, who stands 
as first-bom to God : Sc ravrrig rfiv vijSvv elfT^vgf 
olovel Tig Oetog (Tiropog, ttXclttu vabv kavrt^ rov 
riXeiov avOptairov :^ ' who having entered into the 
Virgin's womb, like a divine energy, built for 
Himself a temple, the perfect man.' Likewise S. 
Ephrsem :* " He who forms in the womb all beings 
that are bom, tsjor hu laqnumeh tsalmo VcarsOy 
framed for Himself a form in His mother's 

Didymus Alexandrinus, on the other hand, 
agrees with the author of the Dialogue v. Mace- 
donius, so far as to say that to Si yi Uvevfia koX 
avOevTiKCJQ wout, 'the Spirit indeed acts on His 
own authority, and makes beings out of nothing, 
but CLTB (Tvvepyov kal wvofj rov Ilarpog,^ * only as 
breath of the Father and feUow-worker with 
Him.' This brings us to S. Basil, who, while 
saying that the Holy Ghost, irpdrov filv yap avry 
ry (TapKi rov Kvptov (rvvrjv, -xpitrfia yevoimevov,^ 'was 

* Pro Christ. Apol. ii. p. 75. • lb. 

3 lb. Expos. Fid. p. 381. * De Nat. Dom. Serin, iii. p. 412. 

* De Trinit. lib. iii. p. 572, col. 

« S. Bas. vol. iv. De Sp. S. 39, col. 140, ed. M. 


from the very first united with the Lord's flesh, 
being made an unction^' icai a^iDplarwQ frap6v, 
'and inseparably present/ adds iv Si rg ktIvh 
ivvof|<rov fioi rriv wpOKaTapKTiKrjv alrlav rHv yivo* 
liivwVf Tov Uaripa' ^Ap'Xfj yap t£jv ovro^v fila, 
Si Yiov Snfuovpyov<Ta, koi nXeiovaa iv Ilve^/xari :* 
* In the creation of all things, both viable and 
invisible, keep present to thy mind the Father as 
the primary cause of all things that exist. He 
alone, then, is the One Cause of all, working 
through the Son, and perfecting in the Spirit/ 
Tiveg Si ap\ai Trig yevvriaewg ; ' what are the 
beginnings of the birth of Christ P' asks the 
author of the Homily on the Generation of 
Christ. TLvevfia ayiov koi Sivajung 'Y}pl(rTov liri- 
(TKid^ovo-a:^ *The Holy Ghost and the overshadow* 
ing virtue of the Most High.' 

Ylbv ovv avOpfoirov kavrhv IXeycv ; * Wherefore 
did he call Himself the Son of Man ? ' says J. 
Martyr, firoi airo Trig yivvfitrttog rrig Sia wapOlvov, 
T/rec ^v {(jjg e^ijv) airo tov Aaj3lS, icai *Iaic(oj3, koI 
'I(raaK, Kot ^Afipaafi yivovg,^ that is, ' on account 
of His birth through the Virgin, who, as they 
said, was of the kindred of David, of Jacob, of 
Isaac, and of Abraham ; ' iv y to yevvriOiv Ik tov 
UvevfjuiTog Ifv aylov,* * and in whom that which 
was bom was of the Holy Ghost,' Sri avwOcv, koi 
Sia ya<rTpog avOpwwetagy 6 Oiog koI HaTrjp tHjv 
(iXfov Ycvvaffdat avrov [rov YJov] efiekXe : * * inas- 

» lb. « S. Bas. vol. iii. col. 1464. 

« Dial. c. Tr. p. 327. * S. Matt. i. 20. » lb. p. 286. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 21 

mucli as Gtod and the Father of all was to heget 
Him from ahove and hring Him forth through a 
human womb.' 

X. Since, then, He who is from all eternity 
one with the Father, very God of very God, be- 
gotten not made, can have no yiveaiQy no origin, 
formation, or coming into existence, I conclude 
that the reading chosen by Dr. Alford, rov Si 
^Iriaov ri yivtmq ovrwq ^v, on the authority of 
only six MSS. and other doubtful evidence, is 
liable to the abuse made of it by heretics, and is 
therefore much worse than the Received reading, 
rov Si 'I. X. r\ yivvritrig ovrayg ijv, which, by Dr. 
Alford's own showing, rests on the authority of 
considerably more than fifty MSS., one of which, 
C. Sinaiticus, is as old or older than the Cod. 
Vaticanus ; on that of the Fathers ; and is most 
correct according to the orthodox faith.' 

XI. Having examined Dr. Alford's digest, let 
us now look at his notes on this verse. 

He tells us in the digest that ylvvijcnc " is a 
probable correction from verb so often used 
above," and in his notes he again informs us that 

' Dr. Alford, who tells tts that he constructs his text on that 
only of which he is quite certtjin, says that the Beceived reading 
yifffirtf is supported by *L.rel.'i.«. by the MS. L. andaU the rest. 
I have carried my eye rapidly up and down his list, and have 
found the number of MSS. in which this passage may be sup- 
posed to occur, considerably above fifty or sixty. Doubtless 
Dr. Alford has collated them all. He might, however, have 
mentioned some of the authorities brought forward in favour of 


"the ordinary reading yiwriaig seems to have 
been taken up from t. 16." Of coarse it must be 
so, since Dr. Alford " entirely depends" on what 
he asserts. " Doctors," however, ** do differ " in 
this as in many other things; for Mill, whose 
work it is a pleasure to consult,^ says, 

" Bed et interpolatse plnres lectioDeB (in S. Athana- 
sii 0pp.), *Iri(Tov fi yiyetric ovTug ijv. Mat. i. 18. Sic 
Auctor Dialogi 3, de Trin. J. 25, ff yevetrn, inquit, 
oux^ V yivvnf^ii' 6^ sic forte Codd. aliq. ipsins sevi. 
Sed yiveffiQ irrepsit ex principio hnjus cap." 

And again when treating of Maximus : ^ 

" Sic Orthodoxus, ^ yireanc tlirtv^ oif^c ^ yiyyrftng» 
Matthsei, cap. i. v. 18; cam tamen yivetnc non nisi 
pancornm qnomndam Codicnm faerit,et qnidem traduc- 
tum yideatur ex versa prime istias cap. yiwritrig in 
omnibus jam libris, eodemqae qaod ad opBo^o^iavy 
redit, hoc an illad legatur." 

The reading above given from Didymus Alex- 
andrinus seems to have escaped Mill, for he does 
not mention it in his remarks on that Father, but 
further, in his note to this verse,* he says, speak- 
ing of the reading yivkmg : — 

** Sic dim Codd. pleriqae, inqait Grotius. Nos certe 
in istos nondum incidimas : im6 nallum exemplar MS. 
Patrem aut Tractatorem vidimus, qui ita legat." 

» Proleg. 757. » lb. 1021. » Proleg. 818. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 23 

He must have overlooked the Codd. Vatic, 
Epiir., but as to the Fathers he bids fair to be 

Further, the Dean says that 

" The yap, which follows [yui/iy<n-fvdft<nyc yap], was 
appended to account for the exception in this last case 
to the direct sequence of kyivvtitrev throughout the 

. But Didymus Al., who reads yivvrimg, also 
reads ixvr\<TT€vBdfTriq r^c /*•> omitting the yap ; as 
does also S. Chrysostom and S. Epiphanius.^ Of 
all the old versions the Slavonic alone inserts the 
yap. The rest either adopt idiomatically the 
Greek partic. pass., or make use of a conjunction 
with the indicative, where the Greek construction 
would not be grammatical. 

But when Dr. Alford says farther, 

" TivetriQ must be understood in a wide sense, as 
nearly identical in meaning with yiwritrtQ ; as * = 
''oiigo^ not merely * Urth,^ Mey.' " 

one may well ask if he be "quite sure*' of what he 
says. He seems to take the specific term yivvriaig, 
which implies only one of the several modes of 
production for the KaOoXiKri Xi^iQ, the generic 
yive(TiQ, which embraces them all ; telling us to 
understand the generic term, which is already 
as wide as it can be, in a yet wider sense, nearly 

» See p. 10. 


identical with a specific term ! And, lastly, lie re- 
commends US to imderstand it as ^^origo,** the very 
word we must avoid, which he seems to think is 
the meaning of yivvi\<Ti^. If, instead of translat- 
ing from the German, the Dean had studied the 
relative etymology of each term, and a few of the 
authorities above given, he probably would have 
written otherwise. 
Then follows : 

" It [yivEfriq] probably is chosen by the Holy Spirit 
to mark a slight distinction between the yiwinriQ of oar 
Lord and that of ordinary men. See Digest.** 

With regard to " this choice of ylvitrig by the 
Holy Ghost*' we have already seen enough to 
form our judgment as to the side on which the 
choice is likely to have been. But that " slight 
distinction" in the birth, according to the Dean, 
nevertheless, iriptf, yivvtitrei ov trvyKpiverai,^ 'bears 
no comparison with any other birth,* says Didy- 
mus Al. ; airiorov koi aSvvarov vofutlofisvov wapa 
roTc avOptowoig ycvrjo-ccrdai,^ ' was a thing thought 
incredible and that could not take place among 
men,' says Justin Martyr ; avlK^joaoroc yap icai 
airoppriTogj 'a birth ineffable and unsearchable,' 
says S. Chrysostom, who to this birth of Christ 
in the flesh applies the words of Isaiah, riiv yev- 
eav avTov rig Sifiy^(r£rai ; * Who shall declare His 


« De Trin. lib. i. c. xv. col. 810, ed. M. 

' Pro Christ. Apol. p. 14, and Quest, xyi. p. 400, and Ixyii. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 26 

{generation P * To Oavfia to irept rriv yivvntriv 
avfifiav,^ ^ for the wonder that took place about 
His birth/ adds the same Father. 

But enough, surely. To talk of a ''slight 
difference" only between the birth of one of us and 
that of Him whom the prophets foretold, whom 
Gabriel announced, whom His angels heralded, 
and on whom the star shone at His birth, is, in 
sooth, to form a very mean estimate of the com- 
ing into the world of the Son of God ; to irpdrov 
Kat fi6vov Tov Ofov ylvvriiuLa — ov ov rig yvtiy ttotI 
Kar a^iaVf el fifl ix6voq 6 yevvfitrag avrov Harrip:^ 
* the first and only issue from God ; whom no one 
can ever know as He is, but the Father alone who 
begat Him.* 

XII. On Ik IIi/cvjuaToc aylov, the Dean has this 
note: — 

" The interpretation of wyEVfiaTog kyiov in this 
place must thus be sought: (1), Unquestionably to 
TTv. TO &y. is used in the N. T. as signifying the Holy 
OhosU (2), But it is a well-known usage to omit the 
article from such words, under certain circumstances ; 
e. g. when a preposition precedes, as cic \ifiiva (Plato, 
Theaet. £. i.), &c. We are, therefore, justified in inter- 
preting £K TV. ky, according to this usage, and under- 
standing TO TV, TO &y. as the agent referred to. And 
(3), even independently of the above usage, when a 
word or an expression came to bear a technical con- 

* Homil. ii. 1, in Matt iv. 2, Is. liii. 8. 
^ Euseb. Eccl. Hist. lib. ii. c. 2. 


ventional meaning, it was also oommon to use it without 
the art., as if it were a proper name ; e.g, dedcy vofio^, 
wioc Beov, (Sbc." 

We may reasonably doubt whether Dr. Alford 
had a clear idea of what he wrote. 

(1.) TLvevfia ayiov, to ayiov TLvnffia, to Uv^vfia 
TO aytov, and to Ilvevfui, all mean the Holy Ghost, 
under different granmiatical circumstances. 

(a,) As a general rule in Greek, when two 
terms are placed in simple apposition without the 
article, the first qualifies the second, and also 
defines it so as to let the emphasis fall upon it. 
This holds good, whether one or both terms be 
substantiyes, adjectiyes, or participles ; the posi- 
tion of which in the sentence is thus governed by 
the intention of the writer. 

(b.) Thus, two substantiyes — avrjp fiavTiq and 
fiavTiq avfip do not mean the same thing. In the 
first the stress lies on fiavTiQy and the idea is — a 
man [who is indeed] a seer ; whereas, in fiavTig 
avfip, the emphasis falls on avrip, and the idea is, 
" seer-man," i.e, a man [whose profession happens 
to be that of] a seer, good or bad. This rule can 
have no exception. 

(c.) A substantive and an adjective. Thus, in 
KoXog avTip and avfjp KoXog the idea differs. In 
the first it is " a good man;'* in the second, "a 
man [who is] good;" and thus, better than icaXoc 
avfip. Examples of this abound: e.g, Iv ayli^ 
ijuXfiiuLaTi, 2 Cor. xiii. 12 ; iv ipiXfifiaTi ayit^, 1 Cor. 
xvi, 20 ; 1 Thess. v. 26 ; wXovtuv tpyotg KoXoig, 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 27 

to be rich in works [that are indeed] good, 1 Tim. • 
vi. 8 ; whereas in koXov ipyov imO.y 1 Tim. iii. 1 ; 
TToXXa fcaXa epya iSei^a, S. John, x. 82, 33 ; riiroQ 
KaXwv ipyayv, Tit. ii. 7, 14, etc. ; the stress lies on 
ipya, all good ; on " good works." So also is the 
emphasis more felt in 6 /xlv vojuloq ayiog ; but the 
law is holy, Rom. vii. 12, than in icaXoc 6 vofiog, 
good [is] the law, 1 Tim. i. 8 — ypaijtal aylai, the 
Scriptures which are holy, Rom. i. 2, &c. 

This, I expect, accounts for liv^vfia ayiov, 
which occurs constantly; i,e. Spirit [who is] 
holy; and not as Winer ^ says, and Dr. Alford 
repeats after him, rather to be looked upon as a 
proper name. For aylov irvtvfia would mean " a 
holy spirit;" but as this cannot be apart from 
the Holy Ghost, aylov livvufia never occurs ; but 
always livtvfia aylov, Spirit [who is] holy. The 
stress laid upon the adjective ayfoc, by its being 
put last, of itself defines Trvcv/xa, as the only Spirit 
who is holy, without the article ; the use or ab- 
sence of which is regulated both by grammar and 
by idiom. 

The truth of the above remarks is proved by 
the fact that — 

{d.) When the article is used, ruling, as it 
does, like a king, the construction of the Greek 
sentence, it disturbs the arrangement by simple 
apposition ; because alone, it defines, and thus 
qualifies more decidedly than any other word. 

> Gr. p. 130. 


^ Therefore, whereas avfip ayaBog and ayaOoc avfip 
speak for themselves, if the substantive aviip be 
defined by the article whose sway overrules that 
of the adjective, the adjective can no longer 
command by coming last, but must now take 
inferior rank by coming first between the article 
and the noun. Thus, we cannot have 6 avfjp 
ayaOo^y but 6 ayadoc aviip ; but if the adjective 
must come last, so as to place the emphasis upon 
it, as it does in avfjp ayadoc, then must the 
article be prefixed to both the noun and the 
adjective, 6 avrjp 6 KoXhg koI ayaOog, Thus, 6 
avfjp 6 awt(TTOQf 'n yvvfj fi awKTTog, 1 Cor. vii. 14 ; 
6 TToififiv 6 KaXoQf S. John, x. 11 ; 6 SecnrorTjc & 
KoXoCy Apoc. vi. 10 ; tov aywva rov koXov fiy» 
2 Tim. iv. 7 ; iv rd^ opei t^ ayla^, 2 Pet. i. 18, 

(e.) Thus TO irvivfia, defined as it is by the 
article, means the Spirit, Kar i^oxnvy i,e, the 
Holy Ghost, which is more fully described by 
putting ayiov after the article, to ayiov TlvevjULa ; 
e.g. TO yevvriOev — Ik UvevfiaTog ayiov, 8. Matt, i* 
18, 20 ; and to yeyewn/iivov Ik tov HvevfiaTO^y 
S. John, iii. 6, 8 — both expressions being the 
same as to UvBvfia. But when the emphasis must 
rest on ayiov, then the article is prefixed to this 
also, TO Hvevfia to ayiov. 

The same holds good with Oeog, as regards tl^e 
article ; S. Clement of Alexandria telling us with 
respect to the article before fltoc, 6 Gtoc — ov yap 
deov airXcUc wpoaeiirev 6 awocrroXog, Ty tov ap' 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 18. 29 

0/oov irpora^ei rov TLavroKparopa SijXwo-ac,* that . 
the Apostle does not simply say deoc* god, but 
points to the Almighty, placing the article before 
it." When, therefore, Ococ occurs in the N. T. 
without the article, it cannot be in the generic 
sense of "deity," in which Ococ was used by 
Socrates and Plato; but it presupposes in the 
reader, as it did in the writer, the knowledge 
that Oe6g is now understood differently through 
the article which is generally affixed to it, in 
order to signify God. The Greek and the Eng- 
lish idioms — 6 Gcoc, God — ©coc, a, or the god — 
are exactly opposite ; and show, among other 
proofs, how difficult a good translation must be, 
and how hard is the revision thereof. For in- 
stance, what difference can be made in an English 
translation between iv Svvo/xet TLvevfiarog aylov 
Rom. XV. 13, 19, and Iv Ty Swajuiei rov 11 v. ay., 
8. Matt. iv. 14 ; — elg to Ilvev jULa to ayiov, S. Mark, 
ill. 29, and elg to ayiov Uvivfia, S. Luke, xii. 10, 
said of the same thing? And thus in numberless 

(2.) Whence it is clear that the omission of 
the article " from such words," says Dr. Alford — 
what words? — does not, as he seems to think, 
ever depend on " the preposition that may pre- 
cede the noun;" for the example, elg \ifiiva, 
Theaet. i., which he brings forward, has nothing 
whatever to do with it. It is the article that 

' Strom, iii. p. 460. 


defines the noun ; not so the preposition. Thiis^ 
when, in the Thesdtetus, Euclides says to Terp- 
sion, €cc \ifJiiva KaTa[ialvu}v, he could only mean 
the port of NissaBa, which was the port of Me- 
gara, situated ftirther inland. Here the article 
would have been needless; for the port was 
already defined by being the only one at hand. 
The same is the case in English, for if two 
persons were in conversation at a sea-port town, 
and one said, ' A ship is just come into port,' 
both would, of course, think of no other port 
than the one at hand. Even in the case of a 
harbour at some distance £rom the town, one 
hears very frequently, * I was on my way to 
harbour;' albeit, 'to the harbour,' would, un- 
doubtedly, be more correct. As a further proof, 
however, that the omission of the article in cic 
Xijjiva does not depend on the preposition, when 
Socrates alludes to a vessel coming into port at 
the Piraeus, he says, etc rbv Xijucva.* 

The use or the omission of the article in 
Greek must, therefore, depend on the defining 
power of the article itself, which is, or is not, 
required according to grammar, local circum- 
stances, or idiom, which can never be fuUy learnt 
in a dead language. Thus, again, when the same 
Euclides says, oi yap i} Kara woXiv,^ * I was not in 
(or about) town,' he, of course, meant Megara, as 
he had meant Nisssea by Xifiiva; Kara ttoXcic, 

» Gorg. 143, p. 320, ed. Lond. » Theset. 5. 1. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 19. 31 

however, in S. Luke, viii. 4, Acts, xv. 21, Thu- 
cyd. i. 3, 5, &c., means " in every town or city," or 
" city by city ; " so that here the preposition does 
not exclude the article, since we have Kara ttjv 
TToXiv, Acts, xxiv. 12. But ij ttoXic was said of 
Athens, as also of Jerusalem; so that Kara r^v 
iroXiv, in the mouth of Euclides, would have 
meant Athens, and not Megara; as Kara woXiv, 
said by S. Paul at Caesarea, would have been 
taken for CsBsarea, and not, as he meant it, for 

Ver. 19. 

Eec. Text : fifj OiXwv avrrjv wapaSBiyfiarltrai. 

Dr. Alford : firi 0i\wv aifTrjv Seiyfiariirai. 

Here the Dean discards the Eeceived reading 
irapaSBiyjuuiTltrai, which is a Greek term of frequent 
occurrence in the LXX. and in later writers, for 
another word, ZuyiiarlZuv, which is, Wahl, s. v., 
tells us, " vox GrsBcis incognita," referring us to 
Winer's Gr., p. 29, in proof of what he says — 
SeiyfiaTiZsiVy being ava^ Xey. only, in Col. ii. 15. 

Dr. Alford's authorities for the change are the 
Cod. Yaticanus, two other MSS., and a Scholium 
taken from Eusebius ad Stephanum, preserved, 
but, he says, "blunderingly given," in Dr. Cra- 
mer's Catena P. P. on S. Matthew. In this 
Scholium, Eusebius is made to say that " he 
thinks the Evangelist rightly* used Ssiyfiarlfrat 
instead of irapaZuyfiariaaiy which implies public 
accusation for a misdeed, while SeLyfiariaai only 


means " to make public/' The Becelved Text, on 
the other hand, is sanctioned by Cod. Ephrsemi 
and many others, together with the Fathers, who 
(like S. Chrysostom) allude to the circumstance. 

Besides that the authority of S. Chrysostom 
is in all cases preferable to that of Eusebius in 
matter of Greek style or scholarship, the two 
terms in question are very nearly identical in 
this case. 

Aecy/ia, whence Secyfiarf^civ, properly means a 
sample, coat, or anything which a public crier 
or auctioneer holds up for sale proclaiming its 
merits, while he walks up and down the public 
bazaar or market-place ; as it was and now is 
the custom in Greek and other Eastern towns; 
whence SriiJ.o(Ti€VHv, the rendering of Hesychius 
for SuyiuLaTiZeiv, is correct. Now, it is very clear, 
that no woman under the circumstances, which 
Joseph suspected, could any how Seiy fmrlfrai, be 
made public among the people, especially if the 
Jewish law were fully carried out, without 
making her by that simple act a public warning 
and covering her with infamy. 

Whereas, however Seiyfia be correctly said of 
things only, wapaSeiyim is said of persons ; while 
vapa(io\{i is in the sense of "example" applicable 
only to irrational or inanimate beings — ira/oa- 
Seiyfia em i/jxpvxov, irapafioXri Itti a\pvxovA As we 
cannot suppose tBat Joseph would have proceeded 

^ Thorn. Mag. p. 278, ed. Kitsch. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 19. 33 

to extremities, and caused Mary to be put to 
death, according to law,^ the idea of capital 
punishment may, in this case, be dismissed from 
Trapa^HyfiariiTaif which is thus reduced to the 
sense of " making a pubKc example " of her, by 
merely sending her away publicly, instead of 
either quietly sending her back to her father's 
house, or giving her in private the letter of 
divorcement. So that, practically, the amount of 
infamy caused either by SeiyfiaTitraL or TrapaSeLy- 
liariaai, would be the same. 

She is made to say as much in the Protoev. 
Jacobi, c. XX., where Joseph, being uncertain as 
to what he would do — lav Kpvypw to ajiapTv^fia 
ctvrfjc — cav avrfiv <pavepw<T(o roig vioig ^laparjX,^ 
Mary says to him, M?i Trapa^eiyfiaTlaiig ^e rolg 
vioig ^ItTpafjjX, aWa avoSog fie rolg yovevtri fiov,^ 
that shows irapaiuyfiaTlZto taken only in the 
sense of (jiavepota, which, under such circum- 
stances, must imply disgrace. 

The formal publicity of TrapaSuyfxarlZ^iv, in 
this case, consisted in — 8rav avrjp irapa to <tvv^ 
iSpiov ^ye Trjv vTroTTTevfiivriVf koX KaTriyopei TavTtig, 
Koi ovTOjg avTrjv (j^avepiog airiXvev airb Trig olKiag 
aifTov* — * the husband bringing the suspected wife 
before the sanhedrim, accusing her, and thus 
openly dismissing her ifrom his house ;' so that, if 

* See Lightfoot, Horee Talm. ad loc. 
« C. xiv. p. 97, Fab. C. Ap. N. T. 

« C. XX. p. Ill, and p. 225, 251, ed. Thile. 

* Euthjm. Zigab. ad loc. 



her dismissal had not been made "public," that is, 
made known to the council — with or without in- 
dictment — she would not have been ^njnotri^vidv-n ; 
and so, neither SeiyfiarnT/iivn, if there be such a 
word in Greek : for her being simply sent back to 
her parents, was to dismiss her, XaOpa, privily. 

We find from other passages that the idea of 
'* making an example *' is the meaning of irapa- 
oety/xart^eii/, as irapa^uyfxa TroitTv,' TrapaSdyfxari 
XpriaraaOai f the infamy, and therefore also the 
pimishment, being made to depend on the cause 
of the exposure. Thus, we find punishment 
added in /uleto, Tifiu>piag Trapa^iy/uLarll^eiv f but only 
implied in Esther's (apocryphal) prayer rbv Si 
apxovra 1^' vfJ^Q Tra/aaStiy/Ltano-ov,* said in allusion 
to Haman ; which could not surely be rendered 
that "he might be hanged;" but only made a 
public example of. Likewise, in Numb. xxv. 4, 
where TrapaSeiy /ulclt ktov renders the Hebrew J^plH, 
it does not only imply " hanging up," * but 
also making a public example of those men. 
Likewise, in Tra/oaSety/xart^wv roig irdvrwv rwv 
icaicwv aiTiovg,^ "making an example" of such 
malefactors, woidd, of itself, imply the punish- 
ment of them ; just in the same way as a woman 

* Dem. ^t^t <rns ^ret^et^r^, p. 413, ed. Oxf., &g. 
'"^ Polyb. Exc. Leg. xxviii, 

* Polyb. Lib. ii. 60, ed. Gronov. 

* Chap. xiv. 11, ed. Aid. but c. iv. p. 677. This quotation 
is not found in Troramii, Cone. Graec. 

« See also Ezek. xxviii. 17. Polyb. lib. xv. 30. 
« Polyb. lib. XV. 30. 

ON S. MATT. CH. I. V. 23. 35 

sent away for adultery is thereby made a public 
example, and thus also covered with infamy, though, 
not otherwise punished, whether she be Tra/oaSeiy- 
jjLaTKTfiivri or only ^uyfiaTifTfiivri, supposing such 
a word occurs in Greek. 

So that, without pursuing this subject any 
further, we see that we can safely keep to the 
Received reading, which is borne out by more 
MSS. than the other ; is a good Greek term, and 
not " vox Graecis incognita," like its proposed sub- 
stitute, which, if mentioned by Eusebius, is, never- 
theless, not even alluded to by S. John Chryso- 
stom and the other Fathers who adopt the Received 
reading Tra/oaScty/Ltaricrai.^ 

Ver. 23. 

"iSov r] TrapOivog, 'behold a virgin.* Dr. Al- 
ford makes no comment on this, albeit so 
much stress has been laid on the article in ij 
irapO. The article ought, unquestionably, to be 
rendered in English (1) because it is the exact 
rendering of moh^T}, the maid, LXX. ri trap- 
Oivog ; inasmuch as (2) we cannot take the article 
here as in 17 yw fj kol fi wapOivog — 17 ayafxog, 
1 Cor. vii. 34, where it is used like " the " in a 
generic sense, " the immarried woman," Le, the 

* For fuller information on this passage, see Schleusner's 
article, s.v. Wolfii Curse Phil, ad loc. ; Suiceri Thesaurus, s.v. 
^at^ahuyfAttTiltn\ Lightfoot's Horse Talm., ad loc: Meuschenii 
N. T. ex Talm. illustr, p. 44, and A. Bynaji Nat. D. p. 185, sq. 


whole class of such ; because the prophecy would 
not be applicable ; (3) the article is dwelt upon 
by the Jewish commentators as referring to a 
maid who belonged to Ahaz. 

Rabbi D. Kimchi, in his commentary on Isa. 
vii. 14, tells us that rroSj^ simply means a young 
woman whether married or not, showing that in 
this case she must have been married, since she 
conceived. And in his Dictionary * he repeats 
the same thing, taking this verse as proof of it ; 
inasmuch as there is nothing in the other three 
passages where noSir occurs, to show that it may 
not be rendered maid, irapOivog. We then see 
what the dispute about irapdivog and veavtc is 
worth, since, after all, it rests on this passage 
only, which is by Jews interpreted as applicable 
to the days of Ahaz, and by Christians as applic- 
able to the Virgin Mary, the blessed Mother of 
our Lord. As Dr. Alford quotes Symmachus, 
Aquila, &c., ought he also to have mentioned 
the very interesting dialogue between Justin 
Martyr and the Jew Trypho on this very pass- 
age, where J. Martyr contends for irapOivog and 
Trypho for veavtg,^ which is a corruption of the 
LXX. attributed by S. Chrysostom ^ to the Jews 
[Aquila, Symmachus, and Theodotion ?]. He ac- 
cuses them of having altered wapdivog to veavig, 
in order to destroy the testimony of the LXX., 

1 D*tt'^lWl"D S. V. Ubv. 
« Dial. c. Trj'ph. pp. 291, 297, 310. ' Homil. in Matt. v. 2. 

ON S. MATT. CH. T. V. 25. 37 

wliicli is far more worthy of credit, he says, than 
those who, being Jews, altered the LXX. text 
to suit their own ends; and that, too, a long 
time after the birth of Christ. 

Those who are curious of such things may 
consult the oracle of Apollo of Cyzicus, given to 
the Argonauts, respecting the birth of Christ, 
as reported by Cedrenus, — Oeov — ov \6yog a^Oiroc 
cv aSael Kovpy iyKVog itrrai — avrrig Etrrai Sofioc 
ovTog* Mapla Si rovvo/ua avTrjg^ * Whose dwell- 
ing will this be ? asked they the god. In time, 
said he, the Word of God shall be born of a 
pure maiden, whose name is Mary, and this shall 
be her house.' 

Ver. 25. 

Here, instead of the Received and familiar 
?aic ov sTeKB tov vlbv avTYJg tov TrpwroroKOv, Dr. 
Alford gives, in his text, the wholesale alteration, 
6WC ov ireKE vlov, that can hardly be rendered 
" till she had brought forth a son," that is, not "a 
daughter;'* but must be rendered " a child,*' This, 
however, is more than we can take in all at once ; 
and had Dr. Alford considered the matter more 
attentively, he probably would have seen that 
the omission of the article in ereKev vlov, which 
is the reading of his favouYite Cod. Yaticanus, 
must have been a mistake of the copyist. 

Without the article creicev vlov simply means 
that the Virgin brought forth " a child ;" for to 

> Hist. Compend. p. 209, ed. Dindorf. See also Orac. Sibyll. 
p. 760, sqq. 


specify that it was a man-child, it would have 
been viov app^va, as in Apoc. xii. 5. The article, 
however, sreiccv rov vlov, defines *the son* by 
referring him to the prophecy, v. 21, and to what 
follows as far as v. 25, inclusive. 

Thus reads the Coptic, rov viov; and this 
would be sufficient, as rov wpwroroKov might 
easily be gathered from the context. The Sa- 
hidic, however, reads rov viov avrfjcj which is 
yet better ; while the Peschito, which is a higher 
authority than either of those two versions, rcjads 
with the Ethiopic, the Armenian, and the other 
old versions, Cod. Ephraem, and a host of other 
MSS. rov viov avTYig rov TT/owroroicov, which is 
the reading followed by S. Chrysostom. 

With due deference to the Dean, therefore, 
must I, for my part, demur to trciccv viov, pariet 
filium, which, neither in Greek nor in Latin, 
determines anything ; and so keep to the Received 


Ver. 1. 

'iSov, fiayoi airq avaroXwv wapeyivovro elg 
'UpocToXv/ia, ' Behold, there came wise men from 
the east to Jerusalem.' Authorized Version. 

On this Dr. Alford has the following note : 

" Magi from the East (not ctTr. arar. irapey,). The 
absence of the article after pdyoi is no objection to this 

ON s* MATT, CH. n. V. 1. * 39 

interpretation. In fact, it could not have been here 
expressed, because the concrete noun fiayoi is not dis- 
tributed ; as neither could it be in such an expression as 
apBpitfTrog iv Trvcw/iari aKaddpra). Mark, i. 23. In the 
case of an anarthrous abstract noun, the article mai/ 
follow^ but may also be omitted," &c. 

This is beyond me ; at least, I cannot see what 
it has to do with the subject in hand ; but I trust 
other students may discover, to their satisfaction, 
the connexion between ** concrete magi "and "anar- 
throus abstract nouns." So that I must try and 
find for myself why fiayoi has no article after it : 
in other words, why we have not fxayoi ol airb 

First, for the simple reason that /layoi ol airo 
avaTo\C)v would imply or create the antithesis, 
fxayoi oi diro Sv<r/Ltt5v, * Magi from the west,' who 
never were heard of. We have this antithesis 
in Isa. xlv. 6, ol air avarokwv koi ol airo Svo-fcwv, 
* those from the east and those from the west ; ' 
To^orai ol ttTTo rrig avaroXfJc?* 'bowmen, those 
from the east,' because there were others from 
the west ; in other words, ol filv i^ avaroX^C 
avOpojTTOt — ol 8* em Oarepcu^ 

Secondly, we could not have fiayoi ol airo a v., 
because it would be a tautology, inasmuch as they 
came from nowhere else than the East. I will 
not tarry by the Aryan origin of juayog {XQ in 

• Herodian. lib. viii, p. 167, ed. Steph. 
» Ibid. lib. iii. p. 72. 


Jer. xxxix. 3), but only remark that according- 
to Greek writers, such as Strabo,^ and Diogenes 
Laertius,* yeyevrjtTdai irapa /jIv Ylipacug Mayovg-, 
irapa St Ba/3uXaivfotc ^ ^A<r<Tvpioig XaXSalovg, koi 
rviLLvo<TO(jii(TTag Trap' 'Iv8oTc> Trapa re KcXroTc koi 
TaXaraig tovq icaXov/Lttvovc ApvtSag kol Se/lcvo- 
Oiovg, * that of old there were wise men called 
Magi among the Persians {rndgh, ddna u ddnish- 
mand ast,^ juayog is a learned and wise man) ; 
Chaldeans among the Babylonians and the As- 
syrians; Gymnosophists (Brahmins) among the 
Indians ; Druids and high-priests among the Celts 
and the Gauls ; ' while Michael Glycas says, juaywc 
ly\(is)pi(i)Q ol Hipfrai Xiyovrai,* ' that the Persians 
are called magoa in their own tongue and country/ 
and that nayoi ek UeptrlSoQ eIq irpoaKvvr\<nv avrov 
irapayivovraiy * Magi of Persia came to worship 

Justin Martyr ^ says they came from Arabia ; 
but even if his opinion were correct, the country 
imderstood by Arabia ia his days would yet, like 
Persia, be situated within the east, or avaroXat, 
successive risings of the sun, as understood by the 
Greeks, who held that — 

T17V fxiv yap evrog avaroXuyv iratrav (txeSov 
oIkov(tlv 'IvSot — 

* Lib. xvi. e. ii. 89. • Proem, i. 
' Desatir Vocab. of anc. terms, p. 61. 

* Annal. ii. p. 244 ; iii. p. 8B7, ed. Dind. 

* P. 304. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 1. 41 

*Iv8oi fiev ovv fieraSv depivHjv avaroXwv koI 
Xeifiepiviov oIkov<ti^ — 

* Indians inhabited the country situated between 
the summer and the winter sun-risings (solstices).' 
Therefore was avaroXri sometimes used for " the 
east/' but avaroXai far oftener, and by certain 
writers, almost exclusively to mean the countries 
to the east, the east in general. 

Thirdly, had the intention of the writer been 
to say those fiayot were natives of the east, 
inistead of simply telling us they came from 
thence, he would, like Eusebius, M. Glycas, and 
others, have said I? avaroXtJv, as they do lie 
UepaiSog, I? avaroXfjc fJLayoi.^ But knowing well 
that as every body believed, jdayoi were at home 
in the east, and could originate from nowhere 
else, he did not stop to state the place of their 
birth or extraction, maybe Persia ; but only told 
the fact that they came from the wide east, awb 
avaroXiov, to Jerusalem. 

For albeit such passages as elg airo ^Traprrig 
— EKTog i^ AirwXiag ; ^ ol airo neXoTTOWTjcrov, Lq> 
Ii^OTrovvr)<noL \^ Aiopieig ^cv ol awo AcS^ov — 
la^ovcTL Sc o£ airo "Idjvog rov !SvOov (jivvreg,^ seem 
at first to imply the same kind ojf origin, yet 
even here airo means "descent'' as "from;" 
whereas bk expresses the real extraction "out 

• Scymni Chii, ari^iuy. 170, 175. 

* Euseb. ii. Eccles. lib. i. c. viii. ^ Electra, 700, sqq. 

* Herod, viii. 70, 79, 114. * Dicsearch. Gresc, iii. 2, 3. 

42 REMARKS^ Era 

of," as in irar/ooOev, Ik Aioc n^xovrai ;* Ik OecUv — 
£^vv ;' Ik row Gcov l^i}X0ov Koi ^koi.' Comp. l^^/o- 
\ofiai with awipxofiai — airo Gcov iXriXvOag ;* Nico- 
demus could not have said i^riXOf^, as he did 
not know of Christ's extraction, but only that, 
like a prophet, He was come "from" God ; where- 
as the Apostles confessed 8tl airo Gcov iSijX&cv,^ 
as taught by Him ;^ wherein we can compare the 
relative meaning of otto and Ik. So also is light 
issuing from the east described as 12 avaroXwv 
X/ovcTt^r fiaXiara to (jiiyyoc opaOiv boikev'^ — 12 ava- 
ToXwv, rj Svtrewg, el tv\oi, air6 rt fXitnfi^plag ;® 
likewise, air avaroXwv lirX Svtr/Jiag ^ipeaOai Trav- 
rac rove atrripag.^ 

Whence it must appear that, in /layoi airo 
avaroXtJv irapiyivovro elg 'Ic/o., airo cannot, as 
Dr. Alford says, be construed with fxayoi, but 
that, as it refers to the place whence they started 
on their journey, so also must it be construed with 
vapeyivovTOy the place at which they arrived. 

On this the Dean writes : — 

"De Wette remarks, that if airb dvar. belonged to 
wapey., it would probably ^Z/oto that verb, as If otov 
does, ref. Luke [i.e. S. Luke, xi. 6]. I may add that 
irapaylvofiai occurs with a preposition and a substan- 

> 01. vii. 40. • Pyth. i. 79. » S. John, viii. 42, &c. 

* Id. iii. 2. » Ibid. xvi. 30. « Ibid. xiii. 3. 

f Heraclid. AUeg. Horn. p. 418, ed. Gale. 
« Herodian. lib. vii. p. 149, ed. H. Staph. 
» Anaxag. ap. Stob. Phys. c. 24. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 1. 43 

tive twelve times in the N. T. , and in no case are they 

This is an oversight; irapayivojiai thus con- 
strued occurs thirteen times in the N.T., and in 
Acts, xiii. 14, we read avroX Se StcXflovrec awo 
Trig nijoyrjc irapeyevovro elg 'Avrto^etav, which 
Wahl rightly mentions as proving, together with 
this passage, S. Matt. ii. 1, that airo is to be con- 
strued with wapEyivovTo. 

And so understand it (1) Protoevang. Jacobi, 
0. xxi., where we read irapeyivovro fiayoi airo 
avaroXwv elg 'Up. ed. Fabric.,^ rendered ^XOov 
yap fiayoi airo avaroXiov, in Thile's ed.,^ thus 
placing beyond a doubt that airo is to be con- 
strued with irapey., and not with fiayoi* So also 
is it rendered by (2) Sahid., (3) Memph., (4) 
Syr., (5) Pers., (6) Arab. Erpen., (7) Arab. Pol. ; 
while Armen. Georg. and Slav, render the Greek 
literally, and are liable to precisely the same 
construction. The Ethiopic reads masagalan 
amhaher tsdbah, "wizards (not magi) from the 
east country " correctly ; since " wizards *' came 
from elsewhere than from the east, though 
" Magi " did not. (8) Theophylact, (9) A. Saxon 
Vers., (10) Evang. Inf. Arab.,' (11) Evang. de 
NatiT. B. Marise,* (12) Iren. adv. Hseres.,^ (13) 
Evang. S. Matt. Hebr. ed. 1551, (14) Bar He- 

> Cod. Pseud. N.T. vol. i. p. J 13. ^ p. 254. 
» C. vii. p. 71, ed. Phil. * C. xvi. p. 388, id. 

• lib. iii. c. 20. 


brsBus,* (15) Solomon, Bishop of Botsrah,* who, 
like Bar Hehraeus, quotes Longinus (?) to show 
that the Magi came from the east, and (15) Hist. 
J. C. Persicfe autore Hier. Xavier, p. 81. 

As regards trapayiyvofxai — TrapayiyvecrOai koX 
inroylyveaOatf^ — vyieiag filv irapayiyvofiivriQf v6<tov 
Si avoyiyvofiivrig,* &c., — is a verb of very fre- 
quent occurrence in Attic writers, by whom it 
is used either absolutely or construed with the 
dative, and means "to be present," i.e. "to be 
by some one." In later writers it is used in 
this sense with prepositions, in the sense of " be- 
coming present from," i.e. coming, arriving, &c. 
But as to the preposition being placed before or 
after, or rather as to irapay. being construed with 
two prepositions, aTro, lie, and etc, "from — to," it 
depends on the writer. Thus, in the LXX., Trapa- 
ylvofiai is construed with the prepos. of the place 
to which irapay. refers, and is placed after it, e.g. 
i^iXOovTeg yap Ik BafivXtJvog — irapeyivovTo etc 
'lripov(Ta\{)ij,,^ which is the usual construction in 
the LXX. 

While, on the other hand, among some him- 
dred and twenty places in Polybius, in which 
TTapaylvEfrOaL is used, I have noticed such pass- 
ages as these in which (1) irapa or airo is placed 
before and is construed with irapay ivetrOai — jLtera 
St TovTOvg elcTEKoXovvTO iravrag rovg airo rwv 

> In Assera. B. Or. vol. iii. p. 316. « Ibid. ib. 

» Sophist. § 67. * Alcib. i. § 45, ed. Lond. 

» 3 Esdr. viii. 7. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 1. 45 

iOvCjv Ka\ TToXeiov irapayeyovorag ;^ 8ti ol 'Voj/iaioi 
Twv airb rrig ^Atriag TrapaysyovoTiov irpetrfievTwv ;^ 
— Tovg irapa twv 'PoStwv irpEfTJievTag irapayeyovo' 
rag virip tov SiaXveiv ;^ (2) the same preposition is 
put before, — elg Sc Tfjv 'Pcifirjv icai irXeioviov irapa- 
yByovoTwv,* — rwv Se irpefrfietjjv dg 'Pwfiyjv irapa- 
yevo/xiviov ',^ — and after, Trapeyivero UToXe/xaiog 6 
vedjrepog elg Tfjv 'FdjjULrtv ;^ before, rolg irapa tov 
TTpttr^vripov irapayeyovoaL ; ^ — koX twv irapa tov 
)3a(r. ^AvTio^ov tt/occ/B. irapeyeyovoTwv ;^ — after, 
TTCLpeyivovTO — irapa ^ Kptaparov,^ &C. ; wliile (3) 
at other times both prepositions follow ; e,g, irape- 
yivovTO irpbg avTOv irpetrfivTai irapa ficv tov twv 
'Htt. eOvovg,^^ or (4) they are put the one before 
and the other after, as in elg Se ttjv AuKeSaliuLova 
irapayevojxevwv rwv 7rpe<T(ievTU}v Ik Trig 'Fw/uLtig ; ^* — 
KaTa TTjv IleXo7r6vvr}(Tov Trapayevofxivwv Ik 'FwjuLrig 
— (pvyaSiov ; ^^ and (5) several prepositions before 
TrapaylvetrOai, and only one after; on twv irepX 
TOV n. Kttt TWV irapa tov T,, koX <tvv TOVTOig tov 
M. irapayevofxeviov elg Trjv 'PoSov,^^ &c. 

These remarks will suffice to show that when 
Dr. Alford says " not aTro avaT, irapey.'^ he does ' 
not seem to have well weighed the matter. 

» Excerpt, leg. Ix. p. 1110. * Id. Ixviii. 

3 Id. Ixxxviii. et cxiv. * Id. cvi. * Id. cxli.Tiii. p. 1206, 1208. 

• Id. cxiii., cxv., xxvi., xxvii. "^ Id. cxiii. p. 1306. 

• Id. cxiv. p. 1307, and lib. xv. 12. » Id. cix. »» Id. xii., xlv. 

" Id. liii. p. 1207. '« Id. liv. »« Id. Ixxxvii. 


Ver. 2. 

Ei8o/X€V yap avrov rov aarripa tv ry avuToXy. 
On this the Dean complains : 

That " much has been written in no friendly spirit 
on his views on the subject, the question being : Have 
we here, in the sacred text, a miracle, or have we some 
natural appearance which God, in His Providence, used 
as means of indicating to the Magi the birth of His 
Son?'' and "that no one has right to charge another 
with weakening the belief in the facts related in the 
sacred text, because he [that other] feels an honest 
conviction that he is relating, not a miracle, but a 
natural appearance."* 

Quite so ; and we will take the Dean at his 
word, seeing he feels "honestly convinced " that 

"the expression of the Magi, * We have seen His 
star,' does not seem to point to any miraculous appearance, 
but to something observed in the course of their watch- 
ing the heavens'. We know the Magi to have been devoted 
to astrology; and on comparing the language of our 
text with this undoubted fact, I confess that it appears 
to me the most ingenuous way, fairly to take account 
of that fact in our exegesis, and nx>t to shelter' ourselves 
from an apparent difficulty hy the convenient hut forced 
hypothesis of a miracleJ'^^ The italics are the Dean's own. 

There is something so mean, so nnworthy, 
in this attempt to deny the miracle believed in, 

» 5th ed. 1863. » lb. p. 11. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V, 2. 47 

admired, and sung with hosannahs, by the whole 
Church of Christ ever since that star shone in 
His heavens as harbinger of His birth, that we 
must ask the Dean a question or two before pro- 
ceeding on our inquiry. 

First, How could the Magi express themselves 
otherwise than they did, supposing the star to 
have been a miracle, seeing they knew it be His ? 
How, for instance, did S. John the Baptist ex- 
press himself when he saw the Spirit of God 
descending like a dove, and lighting upon 
Christ?^ He, like the Magi, simply *'bare re- 
cord and said, I saw the Spirit descending from 
heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him ;'** yet 
this miracle was quite as wonderful as the other. 

Secondly, To which of the several sects among 
the Magi did those belong who came to Christ, 
that Dr. Alford should affirm "they were de- 
voted to astrology?" It would be a great gain 
to science if he could tell us. Al-shahrestanI,' to 
whose writings I can only allude at present, tells 
us that the Magi were originally disciples of 
Abraham, during whose lifetime they split into 
Sabseans and Hanefites. But that the original 
Magi, who continued true, yet were divided 
amoDg themselves on the subject of the nature 
and existence of light and darkness, whence re- 
sulted three great sects ; the Kayomersites, who 
hold Kayomers to have been Adam, &c. ; the 

> S. Matt. iii. 16. ' * S. John, i. 32, 

» P. 179, sqq, Arab, text. ed. Cur. 


Zervanites, who hold the great Zervan, uncreated 
Time, to be the origin of all things, and of 
luminaries, &c. ; and the Zerdushtites, or Zoroas* 
trians, who follow the religion of Zerdusht, who 
lived in the time of Ghustasp, Darius Hystaspes. 

Now, albeit all these Magi more or less wor- 
shipped light and darkness, yet considering that 
there are few, if any, traces of astrology in the 
Avesta, if the Magi who came to Christ were of 
this sect, they were the least likely to be devoted 
to the stars. At the same time they were the 
most likely to know something of the prophecies 
about the coming of Christ, attributed to Zerd- 
usht, by Al-shahrestanI ;^ by the Bishop of Bots- 
rah,* and by Abulpharaj, who gives, in Zer- 
dusht's own words, the birth of Christ and the 
prediction "of the star who was to appear to 
Zerdusht's children, the Magi." * I have looked, as 
yet in vain, in the Avesta for this prophecy, which, 
I fear, may prove very much like the oracle of 
Apollo at Cyzicus, given to the Argonauts* about 
the same event ; there are, however, in the Avesta 
several remarkable passages about the resurrec- 
tion at the end of the world ; but one, especially, 
in which the Saviour of the world is mentioned 
with His saints.* Certain passages in this extract, 

» Ibid. p. 188. 

' Deburitho, c. xxxviii. See also Evang. Infant. Arab. 
c. Yii. note. 

* Hist. Dyn. Arabice, p. 83, ed. Pococke. * See above, p. 35. 

* Zamyad Yasht, xix. 14-96. See also Kossowicz's edition 
of the same, p. 187, and 47, tr. 

ON 8. MATT. CH. H. V. 2. 49 

wMch is not certamly known to be Zerdusht's 
own, correspond with Al-sharestani's statement ; 
and also with a striking passage in the Chung- 
yung of Confucius, about " the Holy One com- 
ing at the end of the world ;"^ showing, together 
with the statements of Tacitus and of Suetonius, 
that there was a feeling of expectation widely 
spread over the East, far and near ; and that, 
somehow, people were looking for the end of the 
weeks of Daniel, for the Star that was to rise out 
of Jacob, once foretold by Balaam, and for the 
coming of the Prince of Peace. 

Thirdly, having shown of what sect were the 
Magi, Dr. Alford should inform us of what there 
was in the star to tell the wise men that the 
"King " of the Jews," and no other sovereign, was 
bom. We lack a few particulars on this point 
that would throw light on what the Dean further 

" Fearless of consequences," he tells ns that (l)"m 
the year of Borne 747, on the 20th or 29th of May, there 
was a conjanction of Jupiter and Saturn in the 20th 
degree of Pisces, close to the point of Aries, which was 
the part of the heavens noted in astrological science as 
that in which signs denoted the greatest and most no- 
table events. 

" (2) That there was another conjunction of those 
planets on the 27th of October or 29th of September, 
and again on the 12th of November or 5 th of Decem- 
ber, all in the year of Rome 747. 

' Ch. 7g. c. xzzziz. 4, 5. 



" (3) That the Magi wonld see the first coBJtinc- 
tion ' in the East ' three honrs before sunrise ; and if 
they were ^Ye months on their journey, and went from 
Jerusalem to Bethlehem in the eyening, as it is implied, 
they would see the December conjunction in the direction 
of Bethlehem. 

" (4) These circumstances are in no wise inconsist- 
ent with the word atrripa, which cannot surely be 
pressed to its mere literal sense of one single star, but 
understood in its wider astrological meaning. No part 
of the text respecting the star asserts or even implies a 

" (5) During the year b.o, 7 the planets did not 
approach each other so as to be mistaken by any eye 
for one star, indeed not * within double the apparent 
diameter of the moon,' yet the conjunction of the two 
planets, complete or incomplete, would have arrested 
the attention of the Magi both in the East and at 
Bethlehem, and this appearance would have been de- 
nominated by them 6 atrr^p ahrovJ** 

Not in Greek, assuredly, as we shall see pre- 
sently. But let us now look at the Dean's scholar- 
ship a little in detail, for it deserves it. 

I. (1) This conjunction took place a.u.c. 747 
or B.C. 7, only seven years before the reputed date 
of our Saviour's birth, which happened a.u.c. 753, 
or, according to Dionysius Exig., a.u.c. 754 ;* or 
even after another reckoning, a.u.c. 750. Three, 
six, or seven years' difference may be a mere trifle 
for the boasted science and criticism of the pre- 

* Ideler, Techn. Cbron. vol. ii. p. 384, sq. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 51 

sent day ; yet ought Dr. Alford honestly (1) to 
have reconciled these dates ; (2) to have shown 
which of the two, our era or the conjunction, is 
wrong ; (3) to have given correct astronomical 
calculations, and not merely guesses a month apart 
one from another ; and then, since he is so certain 
of it, ought he (4) boldly, and like a man, to remove 
the date of Christ's birth so as to make it fit in 
with his conjimction; instead of thus puzzliQg the 
student and leaving him to reconcile "seven 
years' diflference" in date, as best he may. Slip- 
shod teaching of this kind is neither honest nor 
scholarlike ; but it condemns itself. 

(2) As to the inference that conjunctions in 
Pisces or Aries were ominous of great events, 
we should like to see proved (1) that it was so 
thought by the Magi, and (2) that Greek and 
Aryan or Magian astrology agree on the subject 
in all respects. Dr. Alford ought to give us ir- 
refragable Eastern (Aryan) authorities to that 
effect, and show that they influenced the wise 
men. I regret that, never having studied astro- 
logy and having no special books on the subject, 
I cannot help the Dean. But to talk of astrology 
in connexion with our Saviour's coming into the 
world, as if to draw His horoscope, is derogatory 
from His majesty; especially when that horo- 
scope is seven years out of reckoning. Were the 
conjunction exact to a day, a week, a month, or 
months even, and were the words of the Evan- 
gelist framed so as to imply such a phenomenon. 


then, indeed, might we look on and admire. Sot 
seeing these conjunctions happen every twenty 
years, more or less — Aristotle mentions two in 
his time — Koi aitrot iwpaKafuv rhv iarripa ror 
Tov Ac^Cy ^<«iv Iv Toec SiSvftoic mnftkOovra rivt Sig 
^8ij Koi a^av/cTuvra,* * in Gemini,* — ^unless we can 
lay the finger on the day and the hour, aa we 
do thousands of years back upon the date of an 
eclii)se, it is but doing what in astronomy, where 
seconds and minims are required, wotdd be 
eoimted mockery; and is assuredly not better as 
regards the rising of the Sun of Bighteousness 
over this world. 

II. With S. Basa,« then, ^i»8«lc cXjcfrw rfiv 
Trig aarrpoXoytag KaTatFKtvfiv €ic rrjv tov atrripog 
avaToXyjVf ' let no one drag the conceits of astro- 
logy into the appearing of the star.' Fancy draw- 
ing the horoscope and determining the birth in 
this world of Him who Himself made those stars, 
and calls them by their names; of our Master, 
whom we shall one day see face to face, either 
for weal or for woe, by — 

^alvfjjv fdv T£ Aihg Zfl^oig fuyaKvSeag avSpag 

T£U\H, Kol (ia<Tl\BV<TlV l8' avS* iTCLpOKTlV avcLKTfav 

ig ^iXfijv l^eOywffi'^ 
' When Saturn is in the sign of Jove he makes 

» I. Meteorol. i. 6, 15. 

' Or the Author of Homil. in Chr. Gen. in S. Basil, 0pp. 
vol. iii. col. 1409, ed. M. 
• Manetho, Uh. ii. 150, sq. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II, V. 2. 63 

fftmous men, and also maizes friendsliipB among 
kings and princes ;' or lie may, according to — 

Ziijvl uvvipv Kpovo^ anrvg rj u<Top6(ov Ttrpaytovog 
ri 8 yi Koi SiajULerpog airo TrXsvprjg re rpiytovov^ 
StopBLTai j^iklriv (iaaiXiiiov rj icai ava^iv 
UKcXiwv avSpwv'^ 

*When Saturn is in conjunction with Jupiter, 
stands above or is at right angles with him, or 
when Saturn stands on the opposite side of the 
triangle, he bestows the friendship of kings, and 
to princes that of their equals.' 

"We might as well, and much more to the 
purpose, because ia better style, quote 

*^ micat inter omn«s 

Julium sidus, yelut inter ignes 

Luna minores. 
Gentis humanas pater atque custos, 
Orte Saturno, tibi cura magni 
Cfissaris fatis data: tn secundo 

Cflesare regnes. 
Hie— Te minor latum reget «equus orbem; 
Tu gravi cnrru quaties Olympum ; 
Tu parum castis inimica mittes 

Fulmina lucis."* 

But the mind wearies of this ; and it is of no 
use multiplying quotations or arguing about a phe- 
nomenon which happened seyen, six, or at the least 

» lb. lib. iii. 234 sq. « Hor. Od. i. 12. 


three years before the birth of Christ, and yet the 
end of which at Bethlehem was seen fire months 
only after the beginning of it, if the wise men 
took no longer coming. Can Dr. Alford be in 
earnest P 

Let us, then, come at once to the word on 
which it all partly hinges — aaripa — which the 
Dean says, 

" cannot be pressed to its literal sense of one star, but 
must be taken in its wider astrological meaning.** 

III. What meaning? What astrologers ? 
And where has he found that in Greek, or in any 
other tongue, two planets at a distance from each 
other of two diameters of the Moon — say some six 
degrees — can be taken for aaripay one star P 

First, then, 

(1) Eratosthenes says on the difference be- 
tween atJTpov and aarrip — AiatfiipBi Si afrrpov 
a(TTipog' TO fxev yap B(mv eiSwXov bk ttoWwv 
aariptjv fiejULOpfjtwfxivov'Tb Si Kara fxlav ypa(jifiv nepi- 
opiZoimevov.^ An atrrpov differs from an atrrrip 
in that it is a figure made up of many stars, 
whereas a star is one, and drawn with one line 
or circumference. 

(2) Achilles Tatius — 'A<ttt}/) l<m trtjfxa Oeiov 
ovpaviov — (TC)jJia \afXTrpoVy kcli ovSi wore oracrtv 
e^ov — Itti plv ru}V irXavfiTwv ovrwg Hpri<TdaL SokcT. 
01 yap HvOayopeioi oi fJi6vov rove irXavijrac 

* Ad Arati Phsen. p. 263, ed. UranoL 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 55 

aoTBpag j3oi;Xovrai iSiay icivri<riv €X^*^ aWa Kal 
rove cnrXavHg : ^ ' A star is a divine, heavenly 
body, a brilliant body, tbat is, never still, so that 
"star" is also said of a planet. The Pythago- 
reans say that not only the planet-stars, but the 
fixed stars also, have a revolution of their own.' 

(3) And, again, speaking of the difference 
between aarpov and atrrrip, the same author says : 
^AtTTYip €<TTi wg av 6 rov K/oovov, t} rou 'Epfxov, elg 
apiOfit^, *'A(TTpov Si TO tK TToWtJV aoriptov (Tvcrrrifxa, 
ijg ri 'AvS/oo/ulSa* oiSc Si rr/v Sia^opav Kal "Aparog'^ 

"AcTT/oa SiaKplvag' ItrKi^paro S' ug iviavTov 

* A star is like that of Saturn or of Mercury, 
one in number. A constellation (sidus), however, 
is a system of many stars, as, for instance, Andro- 
meda. Aratus knew well the difference when he 
distinguished the afrrpa from the stars which he 
considered with regard to the year.' 

Diodorus and other mathematicians c^U the 
signs of the zodiac and the seven planets acrrpa ; 
Tov Kvva jjivTOi aaripa ovra, ev t(^ j3f«j> a<TTpov 
\iyofiev' aXX' 6 juiev a(jrrip kolI atrrpov' ovk^ti Sc to 
avairaXiv. ' The Dog-star also, though it be a star, 
we, in common life, call an aor/oov, sidus ; for a 
star may be called an atrrpovy a heavenly body, 
though never, on the contrary, can an atrrpov be 

» Isag. in Arati Phaen. p. 132, ib. « lb. p. 134. 
* Arat. PhflBn. 11, 13, ed. Bekk. 


called aaripa, a star/ Callimacliiis,^ therefore, is 
wrong in calling the seyen stars in the hair of 
Berenice aaripa, a star. £ci| oifv 6 fiev aartip 
<r(upa ivwpivov' to Si aarpov Ik Su<rrwTwv, Koi 
itpidpivwv, * Let us, then, understand bj a star a 
body which is alone ; and by an aarpov, or con- 
stellation, one made up of separate stars, but de- 
fined in its outline/ 

(4r) No wonder, then, if astronomers call Sa- 
turn and Mercury each a star, aaripa ; astrologers, 
speaking of a conjunction of two planets, should 
call them — not afrrlpa, one star, as Dr. Alford 
says, but — aarlp^Q afi^w, "the two stars," thus: — 

El 8' apa Sij Miivijv ScKarrfwa aariptq afii^w 
"Apcoc Si Kpovoio, At^c Si r airoorpo^oc aarrip 

*But if the two stars, Mars and Saturn, deci- 
mate the Moon, and the star of Jupiter be op- 
posed to them,' &c. 

(5) Likewise does the Scholiast in Aratus say, 
l<rriov Si 6ti aarfjp filv lariv S icat fiovov iarl koL 
oif icaO* avTov KtvHrai, olov KpovoQy Ztvg KaX to. 
TOiavra' atrrpov Si, r6 re Kivovfuvov koi to Ik 
wXdoTwv a<rrip(jjv (rvcmjfca, olov KapKtvog, Aia)v.^ 
* Bear in mind that afrrfip is that which is alone 

> *Arr>i^ is not mentioned in CaUimachns, Fragm. ad Comam 
Beren. i. ed. J. Blomf. but ni^t. 

* Manetho, lib. vi. (iii.), ^84, sq. 

* Phsen, 10, p. 00, ed, Bekk. 

ON S. MATT. car. II. V. 2. 67 

and does not revolve upon itself, as Saturn, Jupi- 
ter, and sucli like ; whereas aarpov is taken both 
for that which revolves upon itself and for that 
which is made up of other stars.' 

(6) So also Poseidonius — Sm^l/oav 8l aaripa 
atrrpov, says that a star differs from an aarpov — 
atTTpov 8e elvai atjfia deiov Xafxirpov Koi wvpwSegf 
ovSIttotc (TTCKTiv ^x^^* ^^ A^^^ J^P '''^^ l(mv aarrfipy 
Kol aarpov ovo jULaffOfitrerai ScrfvrwCj^ ov fxfjv avdira- 
Xiv. * For an aarrpov is a divine and brilliant body 
of fire, never at rest. If, however, some such be 
a star it will of course be called aarpov, though 
never the contrary.' Thus is the Dog-star called 
a<rrfip in Plut. Is. and Os. Or. iElian H. An. xiv. 
24, &c., and atrrpov in -SUan H. An. fr. 115 ; 
Died. Sic. I. 19, &c. 

So that the two stars, Jupiter and Saturn, in 
the Dean's conjunction, would not have been 
called affrpov, since, according to Greek astrono- 
mers, atTTpov consists of stars Siccttwtwv, ' apart,* 
and wpKTjuLivwv, * defined as to place and number;* 
a description that would not apply to two planets 
gradually changing their relative positions ; neither 
woidd those two stars have been called atrripa, *one 
star,' since two such planets in conjunction are 
by Greek astrologers distinctly said to be atrrlpeg 
afc^oi, ' the two stars,' atrriptQ tv^eyyzig or aivoi :^ 
neither would they have been mentioned as tijc 

> In Stob. Eclog.Phys. c. 24. 

* Man. lib. vi. (iii.), 661, sq. 686, &c. 


7cvl9Xiic aarpa^^ unless, as in Manetho's case, the 
Sun and Moon, Yenus, Mars and Saturn, Jupitor, 
and Mercury, yea, even the Centaur, had all 
joined together. 

IV. The wise men, however, most likely did 
not either right themselves according to Greek 
astrologers, nor speak Greek. But their astro- 
nomy or astrology was their own, and when at 
Jerusalem they probably spoke Syriac or Ara- 
mean, in order to make themselves understood of 
the people whom they asked where the King of 
the Jews was bom. 

As to their astrology, if they were genuine 
disciples of Zerdusht, it was but scanty. No- 
where in Zoroaster's genuine writings are even 
the signs of the zodiac mentioned, much less the 
planets; albeit in later portions of the Avesta, 
attributed to him, frequent homage is paid to the 
Sun and Moon, to the star Tistrya (the Dog-star) 
and to the stars Catavae9a that joins with Tistrya 
in procuring rain, &c. ; to Yanant, to Hapto- 
iringa and other stars, supposed to preside over 
the several quarters of the earth. But never is 
more than one of these stars called ^tarey atrriip ; 
when many, then always gtaroy atrripeg ; e.g. Tis- 
trim gtarem — yim ration pairi-daemcha vigpaeshdm 
gtaram fradadat Ahur. M.^ Tistrya, the star 
which Ahura Mazda created to be lord and in- 

» lb. V. 739. 

* Tir-yasht, xiii. 44, p. 184, ed. Westerg. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 59 

tendent over all other stars.' Likewise when the 
Pairikas are alluded to as clusters of evil stars^ 
are they styled stars, yao gtaro keremao patmti 
antare zdm asmanemcha,^ * worm-stars («.^. creeping, 
shooting-stars), which fall between earth and 
heaven/ and whose evil influence is overruled by 

When, however, only two heavenly bodies are 
mentioned, then is the dual used, as in Greek — 
aaripag afif^w — thus: nivaedayemi — Ahura^bya 
MithraMhya — ashavanaeibya, gtaramcha gpento^ 
mainyavanam damanam.^ *I proclaim the two, 
Ahura [Jupiter], and Mithra [the Sun], pure 
beings, and the stars created by the Holy Spirit 
[Ahura Mazda] / exactly as again in Greek, 6 
riXiog KaX 6 atrrfjp ajxt^OT^poi 8vvovr€C>' the sun 
and the star, both setting together.' 

If the Magi were Zervanit«s, and thus more 
likely to be better astrologers than the Zarathus- 
trians, still would they greatly differ from their 
Greek brethren, who placed all planets under the 
lower heaven — ahroi Si iirra ovrec Karwripu) rov 
ovpavoi)* — whereas, according to the Zervanites, 
who worship uncreated Time as Father of all 
things and Creator of Fire and Water, whence 
Ahura Mazda came into existence — the four bad 
planets, ofifepring of the evil Spirit, are made fast 

« lb. V. 8, p. 178. 

• Ga9na 1. 11 , p. 5, ed. West. 

* Gemin. Astron. c. xi. p. 47. 

♦ A.chill. Tat. Isag. p. 132, ed. Pet. 


to the eightli heaven; Zohal or Saturn to the 
seventh ; Jupiter to the sixth ; and Mars to the 
fifth. In the fourth heaven abides the Sun ; in 
the third Yenus ; in the second Mercury ; and ia 
the first heaven is the Moon.^ With these Magi, 
also, Jupiter, which is the best planet among the 
Greeks, is one of evil omen.^ So that, probably, 
the same conjunction could not have the same 
meaning for astrologers east and west. 

Likewise, if those wise men were Sabians, a 
conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn must have 
been rather dreaded than looked to as an aus- 
picious event; judging, at least, from what we 
read of their estimate of these planets. As to 
Saturn, ^'to this planet was given a spirit of 
wickedness, whence come all defects and wasting 
away.*** "Hail, Qod, thou whose essence is 
evil and wickedness,'* * was the beginning of the 
worship of Saturn, in his Sabian temple ; while, 
as regards Bel or Jupiter, to his planet was 
given a secret connected with water, wherewith 
he should disturb all creatures ; and by so doing, 
inflict evil on the good." '^ 

The chance might have been better, in the 

* Zarath. u, die Lebre des Av. in Spiegel, vol. ii. of Z. 
Avesta, tr. p. 221. 

' Spiegel, ibid. p. 40, note 2. See also Spiegel's Tradit. 
Lit. d. Parsen. p. 161, 199. 

» Liber Ad. I, p. 212. 

< Dimeshqi. in Cbwols. Sab. II. p. 384, &o. See also A'* 
B. Talib, on the same subject, and others. 

^ lib. Adam, ibid. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 61 

opinion of those wise men, if they came, as J. 
Martyr says, from "Arabia ;** for there Jupiter, 
called "the great Fortune,"^ was held in high 
honour, however ill they thought of Zohal or 
Saturn. Yet, from whencesoever, in the East, 
they came, and whether they spoke in their own 
tongue or in Syriac, must they have meant " one 
star," and not a constellation or a conjunction of 
two planets, when they said, " We have seen His 
star in the East, and are come to worship Him." 

V. It was left to the shallow-hearted doubters 
of this age of discovery and of ignorance, to try 
and press into their service, however climisily, 
one of these periodical conjunctions of planets, 
which, from their own showing, must have taken 
place, unless we all be out of reckoning, six or 
seven years before the birth of Christ ; and thus 
rob Him of the star lit on purpose to herald His 
boming, and the whole Church of her faith. It 
Was no common star turned to that purpose, but 
a new one, as those believed who lived near the 

ITaJc ovv ifftavepwOri roig alCjtriv ; ' How then 
was He manifested to the world?' asks S. Igna- 
tius. 'A<rri)/o iv oifpavd^ eXafi\pev virep iravrag 
Tovg atrripag, ical to ^wc avrov aviKXaXifrov ijv, 
Ktti %evi(Tfiov irapeixev ii Kaivorrig avrov, Ta Si 
\oiwa iravra atrrpa, ajia ri\((j^ Kot (xeXrivyy X^P^^ 
iyivero rt^ atrripC avrbg St ijv vwepfiaXXtov to ijiCjg 

" Chwols. II. 226. Pococke Spec. H. Arab. p. 129, sqq. 


airrov virip wavra.^ * A star shone fortli in heaven 
above all other stars ; the light thereof it was 
impossible to describe, and it made everybody 
wonder at the new sight. But all the other 
heavenly bodies, with the sun and moon, were as 
an escort to the star, the light of which far out- 
shone that of the sun.* Better such a description 
as this, which errs on the side of love and wor- 
ship, than astrological reckonings, three, six, or 
seven years out. "There is One," says Justin 
Martyr, " whose name is the Day-spring, avaroXfif 
from on high ; avarelXavrog ovv koi Iv ov/oavqi 
afjui T(j» yevvfiBiivai avrbv acrripog, wg yiypairrai tv 
Totg aTTOfivriiJovevfUKTi tS)v aTTooroXwv airrovy /xayoe 
waptyivovTO koI TrpotreKivtitrav avru^y^ *at whose 
birth a star rose in the heavens, as it is written 
in the records left us by His apostles, when 
Magi from Arabia, who knew of His name, and of 
the star that was to rise out of Jacob,- came to 
worship Him.* 

VI. They were taught of God, and could be 
taught of no one else, that the star they saw was 
"His star;** and this, too, in fulfilment of the 
prophecy, that " Gentiles should come to His 
light, and kings to the brightness of His rising;*'* 
which must have been ratified. And to try and 
explain it away by a natural phenomenon that 
will not serve, is but to play the part of Celsus, 
who said that avri rtov iv rti^ evayyeXtti) fiaywv, 

» Ad. Ephes. xix. * Dial. c. Tryph. p. 334. 

» Is. Ix. 3. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 63 

XaXSaiouc ^*)0'iv vtto tov 'Irjcrov Xekl^Oai, Kivri- 
Otvrag Itti ry yevioret avrov iXrjiXvOivai TT/ooencvvrj- 
tTOvrag avrov ert vtiiriov wq Gcov/ ' instead of the 
Magi mentioned in the Gospel, Jesus had said 
that Chaldaeans had been moved at his birth to 
come and worship Him as God while yet an 
infant.^ " See, then, his error/' says Origen, in 
this instance, unable, as he is, to distinguish 
Magi from Chaldaeans, or to see that their re- 
lative callings were different, and thus giving the 
lie — Karaxpevaafiivov — to the writings of the 
Gospel. OvK oiSa S* Siroyg koX to Kivrjorav roue Ata" 
70VC <Te<Ti(oTrriK£. *' Neither do I know why he says 
nothing of that which moved the Magi to come, 
nor yet that it was the star seen by them in the 
East, according to what is written." 

Let us, however, see what there is to be said 
about it. Tov otpOivra aaripa Iv ry avaroXy Kai- 
vbv elvai vojuLlZojuieVf koX firfSivi tCjv (rvvriOtjjv ira- 
pairXricriov, ovre ru)v iv awXavd, ovre rwv Iv raig 
Karvjripw fftpalpaiQ' aXXa n^ yivu toiovtov yeyo- 
vivai, oTToTot Kara Kaipbv yivojuiEvoi icojuijrat, rj 80- 
KiSsQ, rj ywvtai. * We believe the star which was 
seen in the east, to have been a new one, and 
like unto none of those to which we are accus- 
tomed, neither to those in the firmament or in 
the lower spheres ; but to have been of the same 
sort as those which appear from time to time, 
such as comets, and other luminous bodies of the 

* Origen contra Cels. p. 45, ed. J 677. 


kind, according to the name it pleases Greeks to 
call them ; and we think so for this reason. It 
has been observed that in great events, and about 
great changes upon earth, stars of that kind arise, 
foretelling changes in kingdoms, or wars, or other 
such things, which happen among men, and pro- 
duce great commotion.' This star seen by the 
Magi was the star foretold by Balaam,* t6v iv rg 
avaroXy <pavivTa acrripa S£Si7/xcovp7^<r0ai, f/rot 
Sfioiov 6vTa ToiQ Xonroig aoT/t>occ> V ^axa Koi ic/wfr- 
rova, ars rov iravroQ Sia<l>ipovTog yevofitvov frtf 
fjLHov^ — * the star which appeared in the East, as 
hand-maid to Jesus, was made for the occasion, 
either somewhat similar to other luminaries, or 
far above them, as being the sign of Him who is 
far above all creatures.* 

Tivog Si Trig ytviaetiJQ irpoiSpajuLev aarfjp Iv 
oifpavoXg ; * of whose advent did ever a star act as 
forerunner ?' asks S. Athanasius. Ovroc yap itrnv 
6 Koi rov atrripa <nifJLalvuv rriv rov (rdjULaTog ylve- 
mv irotritTag. iou yap a7r6 rov ovpavov Kanp^ofUr 
vov rov \6yoVy 1% ovpavov KaX rfjv orifiatTlav cxctv.' 
* He it is who made a star announce the formation 
of His body; for it was meet that the Word 
coming down from heaven should have a token 
thereof also from heaven ; and that the Eing of 
all creatures, at His coming, should be made known 
to the whole creation.' 

' Numb. xxiv. 25. Orig. contra Cels. ibid. 

* Orig. in Johan. vol. ii. p. 27. 

» De Incam. V. Dei, vol. i. p. 88, sq. 

ON S. MATT. CH. H. V. 2. 65 

" We may further observe/* says the Dean, — 

" that no part of the text respecting the star, asserts, 
or even implies, a miracle; and that the very slight 
apparent inconsistencies with the above explanation are 
no more than the report of the Magi themselves, and 
the general belief of the age, would render unavoidable." 

VII. "No miracle''!— what would the Fathers 
have thought — what does the Church of Christ 
think of this teaching from one of her doctors 
and teachers of us ignorant clergy, from a guide 
of us, poor blind men as we are, who tell our 
people that, as the sun hid his light from the 
throes of Christ on the Cross, so also did a star 
shine in heaven at His birth, as a bright, glad- 
some harbinger of Him who came from thence to 
preach "Peace on earth and good- will towards 

"No miracle"!— 'AXX' ?va /X17 cFvvawrovr^Q 
airoptaq airoptaig iXiyyi^v vpag iroiCjpBv — "lest, 
then, adding difficulty to difficulty," says S. Chry- 
sostom,* " I should make everything dark to you, 
let me explain the matter, and that, too, from the 
star itself. For if we learn rig 6 aarrip, koL Tro- 
ravoQ, Kcix u tHjv ttoXXwv Big, rj ^evog irapa rovg 
SXXovg, Km H <(tv<TBi a<TTfjp rj 6\pei /xovov atrrrip, 
— evKoXwg Ka\ ra aXka iravra eKTOjULeOa, — "what 
and what manner of star it was, whether it was 
one of the many others, or one different from 
them, whether it really was a star, or such in 

» Homil. in Matt. tI. 2. 


appearance only, we shall easily come to know 
tlie rest. 

*' Whence, then, will all this be made clear ? 
From what is written. First, we gather from 
the course of the star, that it was not one star of 
the many others, — yea, rather no star at all, — 
but, as it seems to me, some inyisible yirtue or 
power — Svvafug — transformed into the appear- 
ance of a star. For no star moves in that direc- 
tion. The sun and moon, and all other stars, 
move from east to west, and not, like this star, 
from north to south, which is the direction from 
Persia to Palestine.'* 

" Secondly, from the time of its appearance — 
for it did not shine at night only, but at noon- 
day also, in bright sunshine ; which is the case 
neither with the moon nor any other luminary ; 
all of which disappear when the sun sheds abroad 
his light. But this star outshone the brilliancy 
of the sun.** [The Dean makes the Magi travel 
at night only.] 

"Thirdly, from its appearing and then dis- 
appearing ; for it led the Magi, showing the way 
as far as Palestine ; when, however, they came to 
Jerusalem, it hid itself and again showed itself, 
when, after they had told Herod their errand, 
they started for Bethlehem; a kind of appear- 
ance which belongs to no star, but is of some 
power, endued with supreme intelligence — dvva- 
fjiewg TivoQ XoyiKwrarrig ; for it did not follow its 
own natural course, but it went whither the Magi 

ON S. MATT. CH, II. V. 2. 67 

went; it stood still when they rested^ like the 
pillar of cloud over the Israelites, wpbg to Slov, 
iravra otK^vojuLwv — iiviKa i'xpiiv, ministering to 
their wants as required. 

** Fourthly, from the way it shone we learn 
this clearly; for it did not show the place by 
continuing above in heaven, since the Magi never 
could have learnt it thus ; but it did so by 
alighting from above. For you know that a star 
could not point to so small a spot as that of a hut 
or a cottage, much less to that in which the body 
of a child lay, 'EvetS^ yap airtipov to v\pog oiic 
ripKU oSrw (TTSvov tovov "xapaKTiipiaai jcat yvwpi^ 
aai Tolg fioyXofnivoic iSsiv — since, owing to the 
immense height at which a star is in heaven, it 
could not from thence single out so small a spot, 
and make it known to those who wished to see it. 
We see this by the moon which, though so much 
nearer the earth, yet never points to any one 
object in particular. 11 wc ovv 6 iorij/o, eliri /xoe, 
Toirov ovTUf ^Tsvov j>aTvriQ kol KuXvfirig iSeiKvv, d 
fifl TO v\pri\bv eKtivo aj>sig Kona) Karifiri, kol iirep 
avTtig iffTTd Tijg K£^aXrig tov iraiSiov ; ' how then, 
tell me, could the star point to so small a spot as 
that of the hut and of the manger, unless it 
came down from on high, and rested over the 
head of the little child P ' The Evangelist says as 
much: Lo, the star went before them, till it came 
and stood over where the young child was. Thou 
seest, then, by how many proofs we come to know 
that the star neither was one of the many others, 


nor followed the course one would naturally hare 
supposed from its outward appearance as a star,'^ 

"A star/* says S. EphrcMn/** whose bright- 
ness was not in nature, shone forth at once. It 
was smaller and yet greater than the stm; 
smaller in the light it gaye, but far greater in 
the hidden virtue of its mysterious nature. 
One star of the Day-spring {denhOf avaroXrig)— 
darted His rays into the region of death, and led 
as by the hand, like blind men, the inhabitants 
thereof, who came and received great light. 
They oflfered Him their gifts, they received life, 
they worshipped, and returned home. The Son 
had two heralds, one on high and one bdow: 
the star sang in the heavens, and John pro- 
claimed His coming upon earth.'* . 

IIov Si Tov btfI BnOXtlfjL ipafJL6vTa vporepov €k 
Trig etjjag atrripa, tov 68»ryov rtjv fiajbfv Koi 7rp6- 
^evov ; i)(fo rl K^yii) Xiyeiv Ik rwv ovpavttov* lic€t- 
voc rfjv XpiTTOv wapovtrtav avcS^Xcixrcv 6 atrrffp' 
ovroQ Trig Xpi<rrov v^kijc 6 aTi(f>avog. " Where is 
that star," asks S. Gregory^ of Nazianzus, " that 
first rose in the east and then went to Bethlehem, 
the guide and companion of the wise men of old? 
I also have somewhat to say to thee about hea- 
venly things. That star made known the birth 
of Christ ; that star was the crown of Christ's 

IX. But enough. It is of little use to mul<> 

* In Nat. Dom. Serm. It. 

• Drat. iv. De Bapt. 

ON S. iMATT. CH. II. V. 2. 69 

liply examples of faith from faitliM men that 
stand in bright contrast to the Dean's conjunc- 
tion of Jupiter and Saturn, such as it is. He 
tells us (1) thdt this conjunction began on the 
20th or 29th of May, b. c. 7, and ended that same 
year, November 12 or December 6 ; " seven years/' 
he owns, before the birth of Christ ; let him ar- 
range it ; and (2) that the two planets, some six 
degrees apart, "are yet to be taken in the wide 
sense of aorij/o, star; stella, as understood by 
Greek astrologers/' Let him prove it, whether 
from the Greek or Latin, the Zend, Pehlevi, or 
sny other grammatical language spoken by any 
inhabitants, rCtv avarokCtVy of the East. » We then 
will believe there is something in it, and hearken 
to his teaching. 

We now come to smaller matters. I pass 
over the unsound criticism that settles whether 
an adverb, e.g. aKpi^wq, or any other element 
of grammar, should come first or last in the 
Greek text, from the use of it in versions, the 
genius of whose languages is wholly distinct from 
that of the Greek, as e. g. the Syriac, which eould 
not put haffoith before the verb; but I must say 
one word about the Dean's correction of the Re- 
eeived aKpifitjg i^eratrare into i^STaaare aKpi^Qg. 
fie seems imfortunate in his choice ; for, as we 
saw above in yivB<rig, irapaSeiyiiartaaif &c., he 
does not always choose the best. Now here aic/ot- 
/3wff i^eTaaare clearly is the better Greek of the 
two ; for whereas we read, uKpi^^g ^vXa^ai, aKpi' 


/3a^ SioplK^iVf aKpij3a»c <Fico9re7o-9a£ ;^ aKpifiHc fttv 
yap TOTt ti<r6fuOa* — aic/o</3a>c awtprfaaatrdcLi^ — expi- 
/3elic wpoaioBawioOai^ — aKpi(i&g wiwuKa ;^ oKpifiwc 
elSivtu, aKpijiiog 6/o^v ;^ aKpifUg riOivai ;^ and in 
other instances, repeatedly, inasmuch as the ad- 
yerb in Greek is usually placed before the Terb, 
it only comes after it, when the emphasis is to 
be on the adverb ; thus Hke 6 Kpoiaog, yfypajuLfuUva 
ix<iov aKpifiwQ,^ olS* aKpi^Q ; ^ although, owing 
to the rules of the metre, no great stress can be 
laid on these exam|des from the Poet& The 
received aK/oij3a>c before iK^aaars is not "/or 
emphasis,** as Dr. Alford thinks, but because it ia 
a far more usual construction than the other 
reading, and is supported by more MSS. 
At Tov ')(p6vov Tov ^atvo/iivov aaripoq, 

Ver. 8, 
we read, — 

" 0aii/o/i£v<w— lit. the time (or duration: perhaps as 
an element in his calculation of age) of the star which 
appeared : 0. being the part. pres. referred bach to the 
time when they saw the star. The position of 0. between 
the art. and its subst. forbids such rendering as ^ ike 
time when the star appeared.* '* 

» Plato, Resp. i. 17, 18. • 1 Alcib. 53. 

» Reap. viii. 3. * Plut. De Is. Os. 75. 

• Herodiau. I. p. 6. 

« Xen. Oc. ii. 5, viii. 10 ; Cyrop. i. 3, 16; Mem. iv. S, 14; 
Eph. V. 15 ; 1 Thess. v. 2. 

▼ Eurip. Med. 532. • Cyrop. iv. 12. 

• Eurip. Rhes. 284 ; Aristopb. Nub. 101, &c. ; Acts, xviii. 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 2. 71 

It is amusing to see how the Dean, with an 
inkling of the truth in this case, is yet unable to 
account for it on grammatical principles, but, as 
above, in dg Xifiiva, here also charges the article 
with much that does not belong to it. 

(1.) He says to us that ^aivoiiivov, being the 
part. pres. refers to the past. How, then, would 
he render this and hundreds of like sentences, 

TTf/Ol fJilv OVV TWV £V TC^ TTpWTif} OVpaVlJ^ (ftaiVOjULl' 

vtt)v atrrpwv SieXeXvOajULev irporepov,^ — ' as regards, 
then, the luminaries [that were seenP or] that 
are seen in the first heaven — we have just de- 
scribed them P ' 

The fact is, however, (a), that the part, pre- 
sent deals with th0 time present when the event 
to which it refers takes place, whether it be 
"now" or "then;" e.g. &v wc evofiiKero^ — KaO" 
fip,ipav ovTog fiov fi^ff vfitjv ' — ere wv iv ry FaXi- 
\ai(g, — <Tuv vfxiv^ — tv^Xoc wv apri jSXIirw* — 6 ©xXoc 
6 wv jiiBT avTov,^ &c., in which the pres. participle 
refers to the time then present, which must, 
therefore, be rendered in English mostly by the 
past ; " when he was yet in Galilee," " while I 
was yet with you," &c., 8 irore ov lerri to vvv.^ 

(b.) Here, therefore, <(taivofiivov being part, 
present, does not refer to the past, but -^povog 
refers it to a time past; yet not necessarily. 

* Arist. de Coelo, iii. 1. ' S. Luke, iii. 28. 

» Id. xxii. 53. < Id. xxiv. 6, 44. 

» S. John, ix. 25. « Ibid. xu. 17. 
^ Arist. Nat. Ausc. iv. ii. 9. 


Xpovoc '' time/' says Aristotle^ apiOfioc lari Ktvtf^ 
o-ecuC)^ is the reckoning a number of successrve 
motions or progress; to yip &piZ6fuvov r^ vvv 
X/mJvoc ilvai SoKct — "Orav Si to wpSrtpov xal v<r- 
TBpov, t6tb Xiyofitv ')(p6vov' rovro yap loriv o 
yp6voQy apiOfiog Kivri<nu}g Kara ro irp6TBpov xai 
voTCpov. — TO §€ vvv Tov \p6vov fJLsrpUf y 7rp6T£pov 
y voTBpov :* * For " time " seems to be that which 
is determined [or limited] by "now." When, 
therefore, we talk of " before " and " after," we 
call that " time " — for such it is — the reckoning 
of progress, according to before and after. But 
" now " measuxes the time, whether as regards 
the past or the future.* 

'O \p6voq TOV f^aivopivov atrripog then means 
the time elapsed from the first appearance of the 
star, to the moment Herod inquired of the wise 
men; and (ftaivo/uiivov either refers to first ap- 
pearance of the star at the time, Ka6* ov Koipov 
vrrlp TOV bplKovTa iOewpHro^ — or it may also 
imply that the star was yet appearing, i, e. ;i£- 
riiopog ^aivofitvog vTrip tov opiZovTog,* above the 
horizon ; inasmuch as had ^aivopivov referred 
only to the first appearance of the star, we 
should, most probably, have had toi; <^avivTog aa- 
ripog, as rou Si ^Qpiojvog ^avlvroc yvuKrovrai irocrn 
Trig vvKTog Itrnv wpa,^ ^ sailors will know how late 

» De Cflelo, i. 9, 13. • Nat. Ausc. iv. 1, 11, 6, sq. 

» Schol. in Arat. 724. * Aust Meteor, i. 6, 9. 

» Schol. in Arat. 730. 

ON S. MATT. CH. IT. V. 8. 73 

is tke lidur of nighty the moment Orion is seen, 
[or has appeared]. 

But (2), what does the Dean mean by — 

" the position of ^aevo/uevov between the article and 
its substantive forbids such readings as the time when 
the star appeared f^^ 

He ought, indeed, to have given us his rea- 
sons, and to have explained what the article has 
to do with it, or (paivojiivov either. Here, how- 
ever, the place of the qualifying participle or ad- 
jective is determined by the article which rules 
atrrepog.^ The sentence is therefore "the time of 
the appearing star,*' and not " the time of the 
star which appeared,'* according to the Dean's 
rendering. The English reader may then judge 
for himself which of these two he prefers — "the 
time of the star which appeared," which is very 
peculiar English, and certainly not Greek, or 
" the time when, or, at which the star appeared,'' 
which is flowing, is better style, and expresses 
the intention of the original, which is " the space 
of time elapsed since the star appeared." But so 
little is the Dean certain of what he says, that in 
his New Testament for English readers he gives, 
"what time the star appeared," the rendering of 
the A. Version, without note or comment,, though 
it be yet further from " the time of the star which 
appeared," as here amended by him. 

* See above, p. 27. 


At y. 9, Dr. Alford alters the BeceiTed text 
twc iXOwv i<mif to twQ ikOwv iaradfif not aware, it 
seems, that in so doing he contradicts himself. 

For iarriv, nc> n> 2 Aor. Act. of fonifu has, we 
all know, an intransitive signification; and is, 
therefore, constantly used for he, she, it, Ac., 
" stood still," whereas iaraOri, 1 Aor. pass., which 
is comparatively of rare occurrence, implies an 
agent who " sets up/' or " makes to stand," what- 
ever icrraOi? is thus described as being acted upon 
by some one else. Thus in Sirach, xlv. 83, ifrraOn 
is said of the covenant " made to stand " or " esta- 
blished " by God with Phinehas ; as at Dan. vii. 
4, 6, iaraOri is said of a beast "made to ^stand" 
(Chaldee Hoph. riO'^prj and ritt'^pPj) on his feet 
like a man, and on one side. 'Eoradn occurs also 
twice in the K T. Apoc. viii. 3 and xiii. 1, and is 
then rendered " stood ;" but there is nothing in 
the context to forbid one to take iaraOri at its real 
value, Le, as passive. 

Since, therefore. Dr. Alford tells us that there 
is nothing in this account that implies a miracle, 
but that this conjunction stood ^^over that part of 
Bethlehem where the young child was, which the wise 
men might have ascertained by inquiry," he 
ought to have retained the Received reading, c<rri|, 
that implies no other agent than Jupiter and Sa- 
turn taken as one star, and no doubt moved by the 
same spirit, since, according to Origen, whom Dr. 
Alford quotes as an authority for €<rra0i?, the stars, 
tida v.<n Xcyifca icai cnrovSaia, kclL itftuyritrdriaav rd^ 

ON S. MATT. CH. II. V. 8. 75' 

^ft>ri Trig yvCjtTefjjg, * are rational and wise Kving- 
beings, lightened up with the light of knowledge/ 
and " together with the sun and moon/' evxc<r0ac 
r«j» hri tckti Gec^Sia rov jujovoyevovg avrov, *pray to 
God who is over all through His only begotten 

Whereas itrraOri impKes the agent God, who 
made the star to stand over the place where the 
young Child was. The MSS. B.C.D. are given as 
authority for iaraOri ; but as already said, one or 
two MSS. should be chosen and adhered to 
throughout, to the exclusion of all others ; for the 
moment readings are borrowed from elsewhere, 
and the individual critic takes to picking and 
choosing as he likes, there begins his own autho- 
rity where that of the MSS. ceases. Origen, in- 
deed, uses i<TTaOri in this verse, though S. Chry- 
sostom, Theophylact, and others, have corij. But 
Origen and S. Chrysostom believed in the miracle 
which Dr. Alford says is nowhere implied. So 
that whether they use iarrt or iaraOri does not 
much matter, because anyhow they do not contra- 
dict themselves. 

Ver. 11. 

Here Dr. Alford adopts cISov, which is well 
supported, and makes no important diflference, in- 
stead of the Eeceived reading, dpov. 

Ver. 15. 
On €$ AlyiiTTov the Dean says : 

^ Contra Cels. lib. v. p. 236, sqq. 


'' It seems to have been a reoeired axiom of inter- 
pretation (which has, by its adoption in the N. T., rfr* 
ceived the sanction of the Holy Spirit himself, and now 
stands for oar guidance) that the subject of all alia- 
sions, the represented in all parables, &c., was He who 
was to come," &c. 

Assnredly the wbole law and the prophets 
centered on the Desire of Nations and watched 
for the Day-spring from on high, and for the 
rising of the Sun of Righteousness with healing 
on His wings — from the Fall in Eden to the close 
of prophecy with Malachi. Yet " all allusions " 
and " all parables " did not refer to Him ; as that 
of Jotham, of Nathan, &c. But what does Dr. 
Alford mean by saying that the application of 
prophecies found in the New Testament are fox 
that reason sanctioned by the Holy Ghost P Was 
the New Testament, then, written without the 
Holy Ghost, who only afterwards, and after 
approving of the Gospels and Epistles, then gave 
His sanction to the application of such prophecies 
by the Evangelists P The Dean's meaning is far 
firom clear, especially to students like myself. 

Ver. 17. 

Dr. Alford tells us no part of this prophecy, 
"In Eamah was there a voice," &c., should be 
strictly taken. No doubt that the Bethlehemites 
were not strictly speaking of Rachel's children ; 
although they might be so called by figure of 

ON S. MATT. C?H. II. V. 17. 77 

speecli common in prophetic style, seeing RacIiePs 
death took place close to Ephrath, which is Beth- 

As to Eamah, however, it is sing^ar that no 
one sees the probable way in which the word 
should be taken. " Eamah " (non fem. of on, 
high, lofty) properly means a high city, hill, &c., 
and Ramah of Benjamin, which stands on the top 
of a high hill, as a conspicuous object from a 
great distance, doubtless got its name from that 
circumstance. Eamah, therefore, in this place 
seems to mean "a high place," and to apply to 
Bethlehem, which, like Eamah, is built on a hill, 
or to the immediate neighbourhood of Eachel's 
sepulchre, which also stands high. In the words 
of this prophecy, noi, Eamah, should be taken 
for "a high place '* or *'city ;" as in Ezek. xvi; 
24, and as it often is in the plural with the same 
meaning ; and not for Eamah of Benjamin, which 
makes no sense of the quotation. Moreover, had 
Dr. Alford turned to the A. Saxon version, he 
would have got a hint from it; for, although 
singular in this respect, it yet reads stefn wees on 
hehnysse gehyred, * a voice was heard on a height ;' 
the probable reading of the old Latin version, 
from which the A. Saxon tr. was made ; or, may- 
be, it was borrowed from S. Jerome, whose ren- 
dering it is, according to Mill. Wycliffe followed 
it, and rendered it ** a voice is herd an hee^e," 
while Tyndal has "on the hilles was a voyce 

78 BEMABXSy Era 

This seems a better interpretation of the prc^ 
phecy than to refer it to Ramah of Benjamin, 
and to make Benjamin Bachel's son the link be- 
tween the two. 

Here Dr. Alford rejects Oprivog before icXaiiO- 
fioc, because, though it be supported by many 
MSS., among others Cod. EphrsBm, the Philoxen- 
ian, and the Armenian versions, it is yet omitted 
by Cod. Vatic, and others, as well as by the Pes- 
chito, Coptic, and Ethiopic versions. But the 
Dean gives a singular reason both for the inser? 
tion of Oprivog in the text and for the rejection of 
it by him. It was inserted, he says, from the 
LXX. But whence did it come to the LXX. ? 
At all events, the insertion must be of old stand* 
ing for the Armenian version has it, without, it 
appears, any difference in any of the thirty MSS. 
consulted for the critical edition published at 
Venice in 1805. The Arabic version, published 
by Erpenius, or Fayyumiyehy as it is called, for 
having been made at an early date in the Fayum, 
a province of Egypt, has d/Dijvoc ; so also read the 
Slavonic and Georgian versions. The A. Saxon 
and Wycliffe omit it, but Tyndal renders it 
" moumynge.'* 

So much, however, is made of the real or sup- 
posed quotations from the LXX. in the New Tes- 
tament, that it is predseworthy in Dr. Alford not 
to wish to retain Oprivog on that account. Mill 
also considers the reading without it genuine;* 

» Proleg. 884. 

ON S. MATT. CH. III. V. 1. 79 

and Justin Martyr, who quotes this passage, 
quotes it without OpYJvog ;^ S. Chrysostom omits 
dprjvog kX. k. o8.* albeit some MSS. of his Homilies 
give the passage in full. The Received Text, how- 
ever, agrees with the LXX. and the LXX. with 
the Hebrew ; so that it has right on its side. 

Ver. 1. 

The Dean here rejects koX after 'lovSa^ac, so 
as to read Kripv(T<T(»>v Xeycov, thus making of it a 
"manca oratio." Besides that two or more par- 
ticiples one after the other, without a copula, fall 
heavy on the ear, except imder circumstances not 
applicable to this case, we may doubt if ic»?- 
pv(T(Twv \iywv is grammatically correct. Clearly, 
without Koi, \iy<t)v must mean the same as ki?- 
pv(T<r(M)Vy whereas the insertion of kol makes Xly wv, 
and what follows, only a part of the uripvyfia ; 
which evidently is the case. 

For when two participles are thus placed toge- 
ther, aoi/vSerwc, without copula, seeing that they 
both express the same state of action or being, 
they naturally form a climax whereby the mind 
is led up to the last participle, which, in this case, 
sums up the whole. Kripv<T<T(»)v X^ywv, therefore, 
implies that S. John the Baptist^s preaching con- 

> Dial.-c. Tr. p. 304. " Homil. in Matt ix. 


sisted in saying, ** Repent ye, &c." He no donbi, 
however, said much else. Since, then, his saying 
" Repent ye, Ac.," is only a part of his preaching, 
Koi is needed before Xlyoiv in order to express 
that. This is proyed by the fact that when the 
first yerb is in the indicative, koI is not needed, 
e.g. Ufipvaae Xiyu)v^ because the participle or 
gerund, Xlyoiv, qualifies the act direct, eKripvinre. 
But if the first verb and the second be both in the 
indicative, infinitive, or any other mood, and thus 
express both the same state of action, then the 
same climax exists as in the above case of two 
participles joined, iunfvSerwgy and it also renders 
the copula necessary, e. g. fip^aro tcripiatTuv koI 
Xfyciv;* — SiSatTKHv koI KripiatTHv;^ — Ifc/Da^ovXlyov- 
TEc>* hut KpaZovTtg kol Xiyovreg ;^ — ipxovrai Kal 
Xiyovffiv ai/Ti^f^ but Tpotripxovrai Xlyovrcc/ &c. 

This also is an instance in which it is unsound 
scholarship to guide oneself by versions of a 
wholly difierent genius. Thus Dr. Alford quotes 
the Coptic and the Ethiopic versions to show that 
they leave out koi, and the Syriac and others to 
show that they retain it. But although the Cop- 
tic has icai Xiytov in S. Mark, i. 14, to follow the 
Greek, yet it is more correct according to the 
Coptic syntax to omit Kai between two participles, 
which in Coptic are not considered as two par- 

1 S. Mark, L 7. • S. Matt. h. 17. 

» Ib.xi. 1. * lb. xxi. 2. 

• Ib.ix. 27. • S.Mark,ii. 18. 

f S. Matt. XV. i. 

ON S. MATT. CH. III. V. 1. 81 

tidples, but are read as if the first were in tlie 

Likewise tlie Ethiopic could not express ical 
before Xlywv without giving a totally different 
meaning to the sentence, as e,g. S. Mark, i. 16, 
where kclL is expressed before the participle irapa- 
ywv, and reads like, "and while he was going 
along." So here, had the Ethiopic inserted koL 
it would read, " he came preaching, aud while he 
was saying,'' or " as he was saying,'' &c. So also 
the Peschito reads, " he came to preach and to 
eay.'* Then, again, when Dr. Alford, at S. Mark, 
i. 14, quotes the Gothic version in favour of 
<nnitting koi, which is well supported even by 
Cod. Vatic, but does not seem to suit the Dean, 
he altogether loses sight of the construction of the 
sentence. In Gothic thatet, &ti, follows qithands, 
" aaying," clearly joining X^ywv with Srt and the 
following, e.g. " He came preaching the kingdom 
of God ; saying that, &c." This construction re- 
quires no fcai, because of the influence of thatei^ 
or£, that. 

More care is required than Dr. Alford seems 
to think necessary, in order to ascertain the real 
equivalent of a Greek term in another language. 
How, for instance, would he, or any one else, de- 
fine the presence or the absence of the article in 
Greek, in a particular text, from the rendering of 
it in Latin, which has no article P 

Here also does Dr. Alford omit to quote the 
Coptic in favour of Sm 'H<ra£ov, though he mCTi- 



tionB the Sahidic. Both versions read alike : Sah. 
hith, and Copt, hitoot, Sm. 

Ver. 4. 
Again, when he thinks necessary to change 
the Keceived text, ii r/>o^v| airrov ^v into ri rpo^ri 
fiv airrov, he certainly alters for the worst. The 
meaning is precisely the same, so that, let tlie 
Eyangelist have the credit of having written, or 
his translator of having rendered, the original in 
by far the more flowing reading of the two, fi 
rpo^i) avrov ijv, seeing it is followed by a vowel in 

Ver. 6, 

Albeit my object is only to examine Dr. Al- 
ford's treatment of the Received text and of the 
Authorised version, and not his notes, I must just 
remark on his note on baptism, that according to 
Jewish doctors, the baptism of proseljrtes began 
at the washing that took place before the giving 
of the law, Ex. xix. ; and that the rite itself was 
among the Jews thought of more weight even than 
circumcision, seeing it took in the whole people, 
and not men only.' Some Christian Fathers, how- 
ever, dated the institution of baptism from the 
Spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters 
(Gen. i. 2), or from the Flood ; but all of them 
agree in considering the passage of the Red 
Sea the real institution of baptism whereby the 

* See especially J. A. Banzii De Bapt. Proselyt. in Meu- 
sobenii N. T. on Talm. ill. pp. 233-306. 

ON S. MATT. CH. III. V. 8. 83 

Church of God was then for ever severed from 
the world — Egypt. The only difference of opinion 
between them is, whether the cloud represented 
the Spirit ; but the Spirit probably was typified 
by the wind from the East, and the cloud was in- 
tended to continue the rite of baptism in the 
wilderness, while the children then bom were 
yet uncircumcised. 

Ver. 8. 

Here Dr. Alford throws out the Received text 
KapTToifg a^iovg, and substitutes Kapirbv a^iov. 
Both readings are well supported, so that the 
Received Kapwohg a^lovg need not be rejected. 
Origen, indeed, says that here the ^Baptist, ad- 
dressing Pharisees and Sadducees, makes use of 
the singular Kapirov a^iov, but that S. Luke, 
making him speak to the multitude, uses the 
plural Kapiroifg d^lovg. Such criticism, however, 
speaks for itself, inasmuch as had S. John the 
Baptist aimed at the Pharisees and Sadducees 
alone, he would, on this principle, have used the 
dual ; and they were quite numerous enough to 
justify the use of the plural 

The reading, therefore, must stand on its own 
merits, which are very evenly balanced. At S. 
Luke, iii. 8, the Dean keeps the plural Kapirovg 
a%iovgy on the authority of Cod. Vat., and Origen, 
and rejects it here on the strength of the same MS. 
Cod. Ephr., Origen, and some of the old versions. 
But here again the plural Kapirol is against the 


genius of tlie Armenian languages, in whicli it is 
yeiy seldom nsed, e.g. here and at cli. vii. and in 
8. Luke, iii. 8, it has the singular ; a few MS!?, 
only reading KapwovQ a^. in this last Terse. On 
the other hand, the plural is more usual in 
Syriac. In Ethiopic, on the contrary, it is the 
singular ; as also in Coptic ; so that yery Kttle 
of sound criticism can be made to rest on such 
unsafe ground ; and the friends of the Beceived 
text need not be disquieted, as the change is not 
worth making. Dr. Alford, however, omitted to 
add the Sahidic yersion to his authorities in 
fayour of Kapnrov a^cov. 

Yer. 10. 
So also as regards the insertion of ical after 
^8i? Si, ri^r) Sc Kol, as in the Receiyed text, or the 
omission of that koL ; it is not worth a thought, 
although the reading in S. Luke, iii. 9, ^Si? Si ical 
ii a^iv7\y is more idiomatic and more expressive, 
considering the place it occupies in the context. 
The Old versions, however, makes no difference in 
their reading here and in S. Luke, iii. 9 ; but they 
all omit Kai; so truly is the insertion of it of 
purely Greek idiom alone ; possibly first adopted 
by S. Luke, who was a better Hellenist than the 
other Evangelists. 

Ver. 16. 
Dr. Alford rejects the Received text koL /3atr- 
ri(T0€ic 6 'Ii?<rouc> aiid adopts ^am-KrOeXg 81 6 *i. 

ON S. MATT. CH. Ill, V. 16, 85 

Whetlier the cliange be for the better, or at all 
necessary, let others judge. Both readings are 
veil supported; but koi fiairTi<rOB\g 6 'I., seems pre- 
ferable, inasmuch as kol forms the sequel to what 
precedes and connects it with what follows; 
whereas Sk makes an antithesis which exists no- 
where. Christ came to John to be baptized; 
John forbade Him, but yielded. And when Jesus 
was^ baptized then, &c. Whereas jiawTKrOelg St 
would imply that Christ came to John " either to 
be baptized or not." But having been baptized, 
x&c. There is here no antithesis as in ch. i. 1 and 
19 : )3//3Xoc jiviaewc — 11 Sc yivvmaig ovr4afg ijv. 

The Dean may add the Sahidic to his list of 
authorities for 81. "We must bear in mind, how- 
ever, that Si is not a Coptic or Sahidic particle, 
and that it is used to suit the Greek original, so 
that it is all the better authority in this case. 

Dr. Alford tries to defend the interpretation 
of the bodily shape of a dove in which the Spirit 
came down ; but he does not point to the student 
why the Greek does not allow of any other ren- 
dering. If the meaning were that the Spirit, in 
whatever shape, came down as a dove flies down 
from a height, then it would be eiSev to ttv. Kara- 
(iaivov waei Trepiarepa [icorajSafvci] ; whereas the 
accusative vEpitrrtpav cannot be governed by the 
neuter verb KaTa(iaXvov, but must be governed by 
the active verb elSev, to which it refers. John saw 
the Spirit like a dove coming down, &c. I do not 
fit present remember a Greek Father who under- 


stands it otherwise. S. Chrysostom says plain 
enougli, ixu koi ri Trepitrrtpa S<a rovro totb etf^avti, 
iv Sfowip avTi SaKTvXov rivbg Sef^y roig irapovai kol 
TfjJ 'loiovvp Tov Yibv Tov 0COV :' 'wherefore also 
did the dove then appear in order, as it were with 
a finger, to show the Son of God, both to John 
and to those who were present.' 

In this same verse Dr. Alford encloses koi 
within brackets, ixril trBpiarepav [icai] Ip^ojuvov 
Iv avToVf as if doubtful; and he quotes with 
other authorities the Coptic version to that effect. 
But it can hardly be omitted in Greek, epxo/Mvov 
coming, as it does, inmiediately after trepurrepav, 
though referring to irvtvfia at the beginning of 
the sentence. Without it the Greek would be 
involved and almost ungranmiatical ; and in the 
Coptic, ip)(ofievov refers to Trtpiar^pa and not to 
TTvcvjua ; so that no icai is wanted ; while the Ar- 
menian reads, icat ciSev to livvbfia tov Geou o lica- 
r£j3aiv6v ixiii irtpifTTepcLf koi sTriipxtTO Itt* avrov. 
The Ethiopic b'kewise, koi ctScv to Ilv.rov G.icara- 
fiaXvov ixTti irepKTTepa, koi ifxeivev iir avTti^. While 
the Peschito has, icat elSev to irv. tov G. o eKaTe- 
fiatvev (jjfTEi 7repi<TTepa, koi ^\9ev [ri irepi<TTEpa] Itt* 
avTov ; so that of all these the Greek original is 
the clearest. 

* Homil. in Matt. zii. 

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 4. 87 


Ver. 1. 

Dr. Alford adopts, perhaps because Cod. Vatic, 
spells it so, the Ionic form, rco-o-cpaicovTa, instead 
of the usual common and straghtforward r£o-<rapa- 
Kovra. But one fails to see the merit of such 
arbitrary changes. 

Ver. 3. 

The Received Text, TrpotreXOtov avn^ 6 wupa- 
Z(t)v eiireVf el vfoc, is changed by Dr. Alford to 
TrpotreXOijv 6 Trttjoa^wv elrrev avrcf, el viog. Both 
readings are well supported, and the change is 
immaterial. At the same time Dr. Alford's al- 
teration reads best. 

Ver. 4. 

Here he introduces the article 6 before av 
OptJirog — Z^aerai 6 avOp(»>7rog, from Cod. Vatic, and 
other MSS. The article is in the LXX., and the 
insertion of it into the Received Text is an im«? 
provement. The article, by defining the being 
man " the man," in fact generalizes the term as 
understood in such a case in Greek, and extends it 
to the whole human race ; whereas avdpwtrog is, 
properly speaking, " a -man," and not " maii,V 


which is here the rendering for 6 ivOpunroic ; 
showing how little one can be guided in the nae 
of one idiom by the use of another. This case is 
similar to diSc, *' a god," or *' the god," whereas 
Gk>D is 6 6i6c. 

Instead of ovic iw* ipn^ fi6vf^ — oAX' hrX iravri 
pflftari, which is the usual reading borrowed from 
the TiXX., and used by S. Ghrysostom and other 
Fathers, Dr. Alford sees fit — but why, does not 
appear — to alter it to oiic iir apn^ — ciXX' iv vavri 
prifiari. At one time it was the fashion to find 
quotations from the LXX. everywhere in the 
New Testament, and in truth the niunber and 
nature of them is wonderful ; now, however, the 
tide sets in the other way, and a reading is thrown 
out because it is foimd in the LXX. Truly there 
is no pleasing everybody; but sober common 
sense forms a better ingredient in real scholarship 
than fashion or the love of change. Change ! let 
us go back to our forefathers for scholarship and 
learning; they were the men. 

Now, no one can imagine why Dr. Alford 
mangles this reading from the TiXX., which is 
correct in every way ; the less so as he here for^ 
sakes his God. Vatic, that generally lays down the 
law, and follows later MSS. for the sake, it seems, 
of making a change, but assuredly not for the 

(1) The reading of the LXX. ovic Iir' ifyrt^ 
liovi^ Zfiaerat 6 avOpwirog, aXX' IttI iravri piifwn 
Ti^ iKiropivopivt^ Sia <rT6fiaTog Qeov, is a faithful 

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 4. , 89 

rendering of the Hebrew, nw naS crhn'^ nS 
?nn>-»B N^o-Va-Sr o Di»n (Deut. viii. 3). 

(2) As a Greek sentence the LXX. is far 
better than Dr. Alford's alteration; inasmuch 
as by introducing Iv in the second member of the 
sentence he destroys the antithesis or comparison 
there is between zurhn'h^^y iir a/t)rcji,and J<2no-S3-Vjr, 
hrl Travri pruuLari r<(? BKirop. ; between living on 
bread alone, and living on every word that comes 
out of the mouth of God. For — 

(3) Had he considered the matter in a purely 
grammatical point of view, even setting aside all 
respect for the text, he would have seen that, Zyv 
hrl, Zyv eK, Zyv Iv, Zyv airo, Zyv rivt, koX avXwg 
?pv, all differ very materially. "What Dr. Alford 
imderstands by ^T^o-Erac iv Travri /o. does not appear, 
since Zyv iv is used in the New Testament for 
" to live in God," Acts, xvii. 18 ; "in sins," 
Eom. X. 5, Col. iii. 7 ; "in the world," Col. ii. 20 ; 
"in the flesh," Phil. i. 22 ; "in the faith," Gal. 
ii. 20, &c. Or else Christ, Zy iv rifiivy lives " in 
us," id. ; so that it is difficult to see what Zr\(Terai 
iv wavrX p. ' man shall live in every word,' can 
possibly mean; for, assuredly. Dr. Alford could 
not propose to take this Iv in the very rare mean- 
ing of " by " as instrument ; making it an ava^ 
Xcyo/Lccvov in the N. T. for no reason whatever. 

The correct reading, Zyv itriy is not a very com- 
mon one. I have as yet met with it only in this 
verse in the LXX. and in Gen. xxvii. 4, koX Itti 
fp fia\a[pq, aov Zvf^y which is a true rendering of 


n^nn T3^n-Spi, ' and by thy sword shalt thou live/ 
We also find it in Medea, 123, 

TO yap u6l<T6ai ^yv £7r' taoimv 

" to live on equal terms." Zyv awo, " to live of" 
— as "to live from," would not be idiomatic — 
occurs more frequently in Herodotus, Aristopha- 
nes, &c., and we may compare the relative force 
of inl and airo when construed with ^y v, in this 
passage from Andocides, iwi roig al<T\l<TToig IpyoiQ 
€$ijc, ' thou livest on the most shameful works,' 
and these lines of Aristophanes (Etp. 814 sq.) — 

OIK. OvK av tri Solriv rutv Oetov rpidj^oXov 

el TTopvoliotTKOiKT SxTwep tifieXg ol jS/oorof* 
TPY. 05ic, akXa Koice? ^cjcriv airo tovtwv rivig' 

where we have Zyv Ini r. al<T\, and Zyv airo riov 
avTutv at<rX' 'T0/ovoj3o<ric. ic.r.X. " to live on " the 
most shameful, and "to live of" the same. 

Dr. Alford's alteration in this case is singu- 
larly unhappy and uncalled for. It is such hand- 
ling of the sacred text that makes one lose all 
confidence in the critic. 

Ver. 5. 

Here, again Dr. Alford chooses the worse of 
the two, when he discards the Received Text 
%<TTTi<Ttv, and adopts etrrriaiv from sundry MSSm 

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 5. 91 

not seeing tliat by so doing, he disarranges the liis- 
torical time of the whole verse. Both "<TTTi<Ttv 
and €<rr»|flr€v are well supported ; the choice, then, 
lies between them as to which is the better of 
the two in point of grammar. 

Now, clearly, if we have the so-called " his- 
torical present " in rorc TrapaXafi^avu, we must 
keep it throughout the verse, and have also the 
present "cFrriaiv, and not the past ifrrriaev ; for 
this would refer to another time. It is true that 
Cod. Vatic, reads irapaXa/JL^avei — itrrriaev, but it 
is no doubt in order to correct this anomaly in 
style, that larriaiv was introduced at so early a 
date, if indeed, "(TTtiaiv was not the original read- 
ing, and ecFTfifTEv a later mistake or inaccuracy of 
the scribe. Dr. Alford ought, then, either to have 
looked for irapiXa^^v if he wished to have ioTriaiVy 
or to retain *i(TTr\(nv if he keeps irapaXafi^avu ; 
wherein he might have copied S. Luke, who, 
reading ccmiflrcv also has riyay^v ; thus keeping 
the past tense throughout. Here, in sooth, is 
the mistake, not in the Received Text, but in 
those who wiU mend it. 

It is needless to say that not one of the Old 
versions is guilty of such a confusion of tenses as 
Dr. Alford proposes, irapakaji^avH — i(TTr\(TEv — icat 
\iyEL. But the Ethiopic, Memphitic, Sahidic, 
Syriac, Arabic, Persian, Georgian, Slavonic, An- 
glo-Saxon and Vulgate, use the preterit ; while the 
Armenian reads : rorc TrapaXa^wv [arkyeal^, ayei 
avTOV 6 'SittTava^ dg rfjv ayiav iroXiv, Koi Itrrriaiv 


avT6v. The Dean, therefore, when quoting the 
Sahidic yersion in fayour of i<mi<nv, ought, in 
truth, to have said that it has iaTii<nv because it 
also has wapiXaPev, as also do the other versions 
I have mentioned ; but he probably did not see 

Ver. 9. 

Here, again. Dr. Alford creates the same con- 
fusion of tenses. Instead of the Received text 
Kai Xiyu airri^, coming, as it does, after wapaXufA^ 
/3av€i — Kcu BtUwiTiv, all in the present tense — he 
changes Xiyu into elntv. S. Luke, however, who 
has tlirtv has also avayayCtv — and cSei^cv, and is 
thus consistent with himself, using the preterit 
throughout. The Dean tells us that he "con- 
structs his text with that only on which he can 
entirely depend." He had better, perhaps, ex- 
plain the construction of the existing text than 
construct a new one. 

Ver. 11. 

ToT€ a<l>lti<Tiv — Koi cSou ayy. rrpoariXOov icat Sii|- 
Kovovv ain-^. The Dean rightly makes no alter- 
ation to this ; for the pros, aipiiiai is in nowise 
connected with the pret. TrpofrriXOov koi Sit^icovoiiv, 
that refer to two different subjects, and at two 
different seasons ; and do not, as above, wdpaXafi* 
/3av£i — iarriaev — Xiyei, refer to the same person 
and to the same time. The Old versions, how- 
ever, read the preterit throughout. 

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 12, 13. 93 

Ver. 12. 

Dr. Alford throws out 6 'I^aoiJc, as having 
been inserted at the beginning of this " ecclesi- 
astical portion.'' Yet since he makes this, as it is 
in fact, the beginning of a new paragraph, it 
' would seem better to keep 6 'Iijaovc? which does 
not appear for two verses before nor for three 
after. The Armenian, Georgian, Syriac, &c, 
versions which, like Dr. Alford, begin a fresh 
paragraph at this verse, all retain 6 'Ii)flrot>c, al- 
beit the paragraphs are not marked by a break 
in the lines of the text, but continue from end 
to end of the chapter. The Ethiopic version, 
which does not begin a paragraph at ver. 12, but 
at ver. 17, keeps 6 'Itiaovg in this verse, and does 
not, as Dr. Alford says, omit it. 

Ver. 13. 

Here he tells us that his reading KaraXiirwv 
is supported by Cod. Vatic, and several others ; 
a fact we are glad to hear, as it is the Received 
Text, though he does not allude to it as such. 

The Dean, however, adopts rfiv Na^apa in- 
stead of Trjv Na^a/olr, without even alluding either 
to the different readings, or to the source whence 
he borrows Na^a^oa. It occurs, I find, in a mar- 
ginal note of Cod. Vatic, while "SaZaplr is in the 
text. Mill also mentions Na^apa from some other 
MS. Anyhow it is a very needless innovation, 


and a very summary way of " constructing the 

Ver. 16. 

For the Received koO fi/uvog iv cricorcc, Dr. Al- 
ford adopts ica0. iv <TKOT(q. Both readings are 
well supported ; (tkotIu, however, being found in 
Cod. Vatic, which is set aside when convenient, 
as we saw at ver. 4. Why, then, should aKorla 
be preferred to {tkotoq by the Dean ? He must 
know best. Thomas Magister,^ however, says : 

6 tTKOTOg KOI TO fTKOTOg, TO St (TKOrla oifK €V "XpiJfTU. 

£ir/otirtSi7C iv ^oivlatraig' 

flTicoroc SeBopKwg. 

" Sicrfroc is either masculine or neuter ; but 
(TKorla is not in use, as shown by Euripides," 
Moeris, however, qualifies this so far as to say, 
ffKoroc oirSerl/ociiC ^AttikoI,^ (tkotlo. "EXXiivcc* Sko- 
Tog, in the neuter, is used by Attic writers; 
oKorla, however, by Hellenes. 

Neither author, however, is quite correct, for 
Euripides has trKOTia, in this one instance, oricorf^ 
KpvTTTiTat.^ It may, however, be a "lapsus 
pennae;" for aKOTog alone occurs in Homer, So- 
phocles, Pindar, jEschylus, Plato, Callimachus, 
and Aristotle, who uses aKOTog in the masc. tp 
describe dark spots before the eyes. Whereas 
(TKOTla occurs two or three times in ApoUonius 

» Eclog. Voc. Attic, p. 333. 
' Harpocrat. Mceris, p. 209. * Phceniss. 336. 

ON MATT. CH. IV. V. 17. 95 

Rhodius, and only once in the LXX., Job, xxviii. 
3. On the other hand, (tkotoq occurs very fre- 
quently in the LXX. (ninety-six times), and in 
this very passage the LXX. read ; 6 Xaoc 6 wop- 
evofiivog Ik aicoref, iSe (f><og fiiya, Isa. ix. 2. 
Despite, then, B D », &c., which Dr. Alford 
quotes, the Received text, Kad-qfuvog Iv <tk6th 
is the better of the two ; and to it we will keep. 

Ver. 17. 

Here the Received Text, HyyiKe yap, is by the 
Dean changed to fiyyiKev yap, without his giving 
any reason or authority for it. Surely it must 
be an oversight of his, as the " v '^ c^eXk. is never 
used before a consonant except in poetry, to 
make long a short vowel. The Cod. Vatic, 
reads, I see, riyyiK^v yap ; but if the Dean will 
follow it even when it is wrong, as in this case, 
why does he not keep to it altogether, instead of 
only choosing the readings he likes? "Hyyticev 
yap in a good Greek author would make us doubt 
that either copyist or editor had done his duty. 
It is, therefore, hard to believe that by adopting 
r)yyiKiv yap at the Dean's recommendation, we 
have a more inspired reading, or are nearer the 
original **Word of God,'' he is kindly "con- 
structing " for us, with that only on which " he 
can entirely depend," — than by keeping the Re- 
ceived Text, ^yyiKC yap, which alone is correct 
in this place. 


Ver. 23. 

Again, koI wtpifiyiv jXi}v rfiv TakiXalav 6 *I. 
is clianged by tlie Dean to koI wepinytv iv SXy 
ry FaXiXalij^y which is found in Codd. Vatic, and 
Ephrsem ; while the Keceived Text is supported 
by many other authorities and " omg cv {homceo^ 
Ul)y* which doubtless is of great use to other 
students, but utterly baffles me. 

Both readings are well supported ; but irf/oiir/. 
Iv jXy rf FaX. is found in the Vatican MS. that 
gives us ^yiKcv ya/o, and Iv r^ (fkot'k^ for Iv 
(TKorce, &c. Let us, then, see which is the better 
Greek of the two. 

Now, iTipia'ytiv is both transitive and intran- 
sitive. When transitive it means " to lead about,*' 
as in 1 Cor. ix. 6, iiri ovk exofccv i^ovaiav aSeX^i7v 
yvvaiKa Trepiayeiv ; and is thus used in the middle 
voice by Xenophon, aicoXo^dovc iroXXoic wept' 
ayovrai^ — wepiayy rovro to /nupaKiov,^ — "to lead 
about with one ;" " to lead or bring round," as in 
Euripides, vepiayovtrlv tre irpbg rapifrrtpa ; ' * they 
bring thee round to the left ; ' weptaystv rfiv fiu- 
Xijv, * to turn the mill.' * When made intran- 
sitive by understanding ifiavT6v, ir^piayfa BfiavrSv, 
' I lead myself about,' — Trepiayeiv means " to go 
about " a place, and governs the accus. of the 

* Mem. I. vii. 2. 

' Cyrop. ii. ii. 29, &c. 

' Cycl. 680. See also Herodian. lib. iv. 8, 2 ; 2 Mace. it. 
88 ; yi. 10 ; Plato, Laches. 15; 2 Kep. 3, &c. 

♦ Jul. PoU. On. viii. 180. 

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 23. 97 

place or country, through the prep, irept with 
which ayeiv is combined. 

Thus, Trepirjyev 6 'Itjctovc fag woXeig ^ — rag k^- 
fiag,^ irepiayeTE Trjv OaXarraav,^ &c. ; and said ab- 
solutely for " going about,'* as irepLaywv l^ijrct 
X^ipay(oyovg,^ said of Elymas " who went about 
seeking some to lead him by the hand." Uepiayatv 
in this sense, however, does not frequently occur ; 
it is not once found in the LXX. ; and the parallel 
passages in the New Testament, irepiriy. rag iroXeig 
" — KdjjULag, &c., certainly go to prove that, even 
though irepiriye be taken for irepifipx^o,^ it is best 
construed with the ace. of the place or country, 
and that the Received Text is better Greek than 
the Dean's emendation from the Cod. Vati- 

But this is one of the many cases in which it 
is not safe to quote the old versions as authorities. 
Thus the Ethiopic Version which Dr. Alford 
quotes to support his choice, reads idiomatically, 
ansdsawa wasta, " ho walked about in," both here, 
at ix. 35, and at S. Mark, vi. 6 ; as does also the 
Armenian version ; so that no conclusion can be 
drawn thence in favour of irepiriy. Iv Sky rg T. 
Likewise does the Peschito render this verse, 
chap. ix. 35, and S. Mark, vi. 5, all alike, "he 
went about in," idiomatically. So that, maybe, 
the reading of Cod. Vatic, is an Aramaism, if it 

» S. Matt. xvii. 35. • S. Matt. vi. 6. 

' S. Matt, xxiii. 15. * Acts, xxiii. 11, 

* Euthym. 2, od loc. 



be not an idiom of the copyist himself. The 
Coptic Version reads here^ '' he went about in all 
Gal./' and at ix. 35, ''he went about in all 
cities;'' but at S. Matt. yi. 6, it makes use of 
quite a different verb. 



The foregoing remarks on the first four chap- 
ters of S. Matthew will probably suffice to show 
how far we may trust Dr. Alford's corrections in 
the Received Greek text. We now must examine 
a few of his alterations in the text of the Author- 
ised Version ; and we cannot do better than take 
his own revision^ as a sample of what might 
possibly be substituted for the best of all modem 
versions, — for one that formed the language of 
the nation, and is still as well understood of the 
poor, and as much prized by Englishmen of taste 
who are masters of their mother tongue, as when 
it was first published more than two centuries 
and a half ago. 

* The New Testament for'Eiiglish Readers ; containing the 
Authorised Version, with a revised English text, marginal re- 
ferences; and a critical and explanatory Commentary. By 
Henry Alford, D.D., Dean of Canterbury. In two volumes. 
Rivingtons, 1B05. 


I will pass over sundry expressions in the 
Dean's preface which lead one to fear lest the 
Revision would be no gain whatever, but on 
the contrarj% a very great loss, even as regards 
style and grammar; my object being only to 
examine the principal corrections he proposes to 
make in the English text. In order to act quite 
fairly by him, I will not choose here and there 
the passages that might be most open to criti- 
cism ; but as with the Greek, so also with the 
English, will I begin at the beginning. 


Ver. 6. 
The first information the Dean gives us is 
that the words, " that had been the tPi/e/* are " not 
expressed in the original." But these words 
being in italics, speak for themselves, as not 
being stated in so many terms in the Greek. 
For, how would Dr. Alford render Ik rijc row 
Oijofou, " of her of Uriah," without inserting the 
words, ^'that Jmd been the wife** seeing such is 
the meaning here of the Greek r^c tov Ovplov ? 

Ver. 18. 

Next, in " Now the birth of Jesus Christ was 
on this wise," the Dean says : "read generation," 

S. MATT. CH, I. V, 6. 101 

instead of birtli. Having already discussed this 
subject, I will not further dwell upon it, beyond 
remarking that most English readers will feel 
that, as it is, the Evangelist now introduces, 
neither the " Book of the generation,'' or genea- 
logy of Christ, already given, nor the eternal 
generation of the only-begotten of the Father, 
but His coming into the world ; and that, both 
in Greek and in English, is " birth," and not 
*' generation/' 

For A. V. " when as his mother," read *'for 
when as his mother," Dr. Alford wishes to ren- 
der the yap, which in his Greek text is enclosed 
within brackets, as doubtful. " For," however, in 
this place, falls upon the ear more heavily than 
the Greek yap, which, like y\ apa, it often is very 
difficult, if not impossible, to render accurately. 
Thus, in ScjJij yap trot 6 ic., yap cannot be rendered 
** for;" neither can it in many other cases. In this 
place, the connexion of yap, which by some is 
said to be superfluous (?) (" redundat," Schleusn.) 
with ovrwc ^v is felt to be more natural than that 
of "for " with *'in this wise ;" because, whereas 
yap here introduces what follows, somewhat like 
** namely " — "for" in English is more the con- 
sequence of what comes before. The same may 
be said of the French "car ;" it is, in theory, the 
same as "for" and yap; and yet it could not 
always be used like either of these conjunctions. 

This great difficulty of idiom was, no doubt, 
felt by the translators of the A. V., who rendered 


yap by " as " in " when as," which is not a bad 
equivalent; inasmuch as fivfiarevOelaric r^c ftif- 
rpog avT. would be ''his mother having been 
espoused," or " when his mother was espoused." 
So that if "for" is introduced, "as" must be 
left out; for three conjunctions together read 
badly. On the whole, then, the proposed altera- 
tion is no great gain, and need not therefore 
trouble much the English reader for whom it is 

Ver. 20. 

"AyycXoc K. " the angel of the Lord," A. V.— 
" an angel," Dr. A., better. 

Ver. 23. 

" Behold, a virgin," A. V.—" Behold, the vir- 
gin," Dr. A., better. As we saw above p. 35, 
ri irapOivog, "the virgin," is an exact rendering 
of both the Hebrew and the Greek, in which the 
article is not, and cannot be left out. For here, 
in ri vapOivog, "the virgin," the article does not 
generalize the race as in 6 avOptamoc, chap. iv. 4, 
that must be rendered "man," and not "the 
man," the Greek article not being, in such a case, 
admissible in English ; therefore must it be ren- 
dered in 1^ irapOivog, and the application of the 
meaning conveyed in the definite article be left 
to the reader now, as it was to the hearer in the 
days of Ahaz. 

S. IVIATT. CH. I. V. 25. 103 

Ver. 25. 

" Till she had brought forth her first-bom 
son," A. V. is changed by Dr. Alford to " till 
she had brought forth a son"! His reasons for 
this change are, that the Vatican MS. and a very 
few others make it; whereas the reading of the 
Auth. Version, which is that of the Received 
Text, is far better supported, and by many more 
MSS. The English reader may refer to p. 37, 
for a discussion on this passage ; but if he knows 
no Greek, he may rest assured the Authorised 
Version is right and far better than the Dean's 
alteration **till she brought forth a son/' that 
means nothing, and does not necessarily refer to 
the preceding verses, of which this verse is, 
nevertheless, the complement and fulfilment. The 
reading of the Vatican MS. must be a mistake of 
the copyist, who either left out the article, or 
had some ideas of his own on the subject. Dr. 
Alford rates at the Received Text and at those 
who justly feel great respect for it ; but he cer- 
tainly does his best to increase that respect and 
affection by his proposed alterations. 

104 BEMAJiKS, Era 


Ver. 13. 

"The angel/' A.V.; "an angel," Dr. A-, 

Ver. 16. 

" In all the coasts thereof/' A.V., " render, 
borders/' Dr. A. ; who refers to ch. iv. 13, where 
the same Greek word is rendered "borders.'' 
For the sake of uniformity, perhaps, the Dean's 
suggestion might be adopted. But the change 
is immaterial, as " coasts thereof " is perfectly 
plain,inasmuch as coast y^ or "tractus," is "the ex- 
terior line, limit, or border, of a country," as well 
as that same border on the sea-shore.^ 

Ver. 18. 

" Lamentation and weeping, and great mourn- 
ing," A.V. Here Dr. Alford tells us to omit 
" lamentation and." This alteration rests on his 
rejecting Oprjvog koi, on the strength of the Vati- 
can and Sinaitic MSS., &c. But inasmuch as the 
verse, such as it stands in the Received Text and 
in the Auth. Version, is a correct quotation, and 
rendering of the verse, ai3 it stands in the LXX.* 

> Junii Etym. s.v. * Webst. Diet. s.v. 

' Jer. xud. 15. 

ON S. MATT. CH. 11. V. 22. 105 

which exactly gives the Hebrew original, we may 
be allowed to pause ere we give up the authority 
of the Hebrew and Greek originals of the Old 
Testament, together with that of the New, in 
order to bow to the authority of one MS. which, 
as we have seen, is in many ways a worse guide 
than the Received Text, wherein we do not read 
ereKSv vlov, fiyyiKEv yap, iir* aprt^ — iv pr]fiari, &c. 
as we do in the Vatican MS. For nothing will 
make me believe that the worse the Greek the 
nearer it is to being inspired, 

Ver. 22. 

" Arphelaus did reign in Judaea," A.Y., " ren- 
der over Judaea," Dr. A., a better rendering of 

" Notwithstanding being warned," A.T. " ren- 
der and being warned," Dr. A. If "notwith- 
standing " be not the best rendering for 8l in 
this place, ** and " proposed by the Dean is as- 
suredly much worse. Ae very seldom, indeed, if 
ever, means icai ; but assuredly not here. " But 
being warned," would, perhaps, be a better ren- 
dering of ^i[\fxaTi(jQuQ Si ; yet " notwithstand- 
ing," the meaning of which is more indefinite 
than " and," is the better rendering of the two, 
A..Y. and Dr. A. But if Dr. Alford renders 8i 
by " and " here, why does he alter the A.V. in 
Tit. iii. 14, where 8l is rendered "and," and 
change it to " moreover " P 



Ver. 7. 

" O generation of vipers," A.Y., " rendevy O 
o£Espring of vipers," Dr. A. ; a very unnecessary 

As we saw when speaking of y^veaic and 
yivvrim^, p. 4 sq. ylvvtifia is " a thing engender- 
ed ;" thus it is said metaphorically of the fruits of 
the earth, which is the common mother of all ; of 
animals, and of human beings. ^ Whereas "off- 
spring," according to its etymology, though it be 
sometimes taken for yivvr\jjia that which' is ycye- 
vrifjiivov, engendered, a child, or the young of 
animals, may also be taken for the result of a 
very different origin. Thus is yivvriiiia said of 
God, tyrants, &c. ; as vov yevvrnuLaray^ the progeny, 
productions, or so-caUed creations of the mind : 
Trig ^v;(^c ^at row (r, yivvr]jJLaTa ; * the progeny, or 
the children of the soul and body ; fleov ycvv^- 
fiara,* the children engendered by God ; rvpavvwv 
yevvriiuLaTa — 'EvpvTov cnropa,* &c., all of which 
imply TO yevv^v, to beget or engender, not neces- 
sarily implied in "offspring," but expressed in 
" generation," which therefore is the better of 
the two. 

* Deut. xxxii. 22 ; Hab. iii. 16 ; Zech. viii. 12, &c. 

* Plato, Leg. X. p. 474. » Epinom. 7. 

* Sophist, iii. * Soph. Trach. 315, 316. 

ON S. MATT. CH. IV. V. 12. 107 

Yer. 10. 

" And now also is the axe/* A.Y., " omit also/* 
Dr. A. 

This depends, as we saw p. 84, on whether 
icai is genuine or not. Though not in Ood. Vatic. 
Ka\ is, nevertheless, found in the parallel passage, 
S. Luke, iii. 9, and is supported in this place by 
sufficient authorities. Moreover, it clearly makes 
the best Greek, it lays an emphasis on " the axe,** 
which is apparently the gist of the sentence. 
" But now is even (icae) the axe laid ; — the time is 
short, the old dispensation is about to be done 
away, the nation to be judged and scattered 
abroad." Instead of omitting Kal, it would be 
best, perhaps, to render it by " even ** instead of 
" also ; " though in truth, the change is of very 
little importance, as "also** lays the stress on 
" the axe." 


Ver. 12. 

"Now when Jesus," A.V., "omit Jesus,*' 
Dr. A. 

The Dean is of opinion that our Saviour's 
name was inserted in this verse, as being at the 
head of a " pericope," or ecclesiastical division of 
the Gospels before they were divided into chap- 

108 REMA&KS, ETC. 

ters and verses. Whether it be so or not, seeing 
the reading is supported by great many author- 
ities, the change is, to say the least, needless, 
since both the Authorised Version and Dr. Al- 
ford follow here the ancient custom and begin a 
fresh paragraph. So that by retaining JesiLS in 
this and other like places, we are in company 
with the Syrian and other Churches of the first 
and three following centuries. 

"Cast into prison," A. V., ^^ read delivered 
up," Dr. A. 

A better rendering, perhaps, of vapeioOn, 
which does not necessarily imply being "cast 
into prison." Nevertheless, siuce being cast into 
prison," is the way in which John the Baptist 
was " delivered up," the rendering of the A.V. 
points in so many words to the event which must 
occur to our mind when reading of his being 
"delivered up." The change, therefore, is im- 
material, although it is the more literal of the 
two renderings. 


Yer. 9. 

"Shall be called the children of God," A.Y., 
" render sons of God," Dr. A. 

" Sons of God " is the literal rendering of the 
Greek ; but " children of God," gives the mean- 

S. MATT. CH. V. V. 9. 109 

ing of viol Tov 0€ov both in Greek and in Hebrew. 
Yiol in the plural was taken for children in 
general, offspring, a family, tribe, race, or people. 
This idiom originated from the Eastern habit of 
counting men only, and of looking upon the birth 
of a daughter in a family rather as a trial than a 
blessing. Thus when numbering the four or 
the seven thousand whom our Saviour fed in the 
wilderness, men alone were reckoned ; women and 
children not being at aU numbered, but only 
spoken of as " besides.'' 

In English, however, " sons of God " cannot 
mean " children of God " except by common con- 
sent, as a Scriptural expression: inasmuch as it 
excludes women and children, who have the same 
right to being children of God as men. The 
A. v., therefore, in this place, writes English, as 
the Evangelist wrote Aramaic Greek ; for we 
find that S. John, whose style greatly differs 
from that of S. Matthew, uses rlicva 0€oi;, "child- 
ren of God,"^ in precisely the same sense, and 
more idiomatically ; since reKvov is said of " a 
child," whether male or female, and Plato speaks 
of 060 V yivvriiiaTa, ' God's progeny.' The A.Y., 
however, in both cases introduces the article which 
is not in the Greek, and which is not necessary 
in English ; yet by a strange oversight, render- 
ing viot by "children" here, and riKva, 'children,' 
by " sons " in S. John, i. 12. 

* John, i. 12. See Apoc. zii. 4, 5. 


Ver. 22. 

" Thou fool," A. V. " render Moreh/' Dr. A. 

This is, indeed, a singular emendation. The 
first term of special insult, Baca, is in the text, le£fc 
in the original Syriac, not only because it was 
well understood of those for whom the Gospel 
was either first written in Aramaic, or of those 
for whom it was soon after translated into Greek, 
but perhaps, also, because there is no real equi- 
valent for it in Greek. The second term, how- 
ever, was rendered into Greek, fiwpi, " thou fool," 
as an equivalent for the original Aramaic term, 
possibly used by S. Matthew. The old versions, 
either, like the Syriac and Coptic, give the first 
term like the A. Y., and, like it also, translate the 
second; or, like the Armenian, Ethiopic, &c., 
translate both terms ; in order to be understood. 
For iiwpt, mor^, thus transcribed, would, in those 
languages, mean very different things ; as, e, g. in 
Syriac, it would be, Lord ! &c. Neither does 
any of those versions render jjLwpi in the sense of 
fnarehy the Hebrew for " rebel." They all imder- 
stood and rendered " thou fool," or " foolish," in 
order to be plain. 

The Dean, however, proposes to do precisely 
the reverse; that is, to substitute for the ren- 
dering of iKjjpi, " thou fool," which is well un- 
derstood, the original term itself, which no one 
would understand. For, if written mareh with 
an '* h," one would at once think of the plain of 

ON S. MATT. CH. V. V. 22. Ill 

Moreh; for, as there is no "h'' in juLwpi, mor^y 
the Greek term would not readily occur to those 
who know Greek ; the Hebrew would be still less 
obvious ; and those who do not know these lan- 
guages would be as much puzzled with mor^ as 
with moreh. Cleg^rly, in a version intended for 
all, let us, of two terms, choose the easier. If any 
correction were made in this verse, better would 
it be to translate Haca into English, than to 
create greater diflBculty by rendering "thou fool" 
into moreh. 

Ver. 27. 

'* By them of old time," A. Y., " omit/' says 
Dr. A. 

These words are, it is true, left out in many 
MSS., as also in most of the old versions. The 
Gothic omits them, but the A. Saxon, that repre- 
sents readings of the old Latin version, has " in 
olden sayings ;" while Wycliffe and Tyndale both 
read rote apxaioigy " to olde men," and " to them 
oflP olde tyme," thus taking the dative in its 
obvious sense ; and not as instrumental, which is 
far less common. The importance, " by them of 
old time," of the reading, however, is not so great 
as to render a change necessary. For albeit the 
weight of evidence is in favour of the omis- 
sion, the insertion of " to men of olden time," is, 
nevertheless, warranted by several MSS., and by 
S. Chrysostom. 


Ver. 28. 

" Hath committed adultery with her/' A. V., 
" render hath adulterously used her/' Dr. A- 

It is hard to see the distinction, which is 
without a difference, and therefore unnecessary. 
yioi\tvuv yvvaiKa^ as used by Plato, Aristophanes, 
&c., means " to commit adultery with a woman ;** 
inasmuch as fxoixarai 6 avi)p fioi\tvvrai 8c r\ yvvri :* 
whence 6 fioix^vwv koi ri fioixivofiivri : ' he who 
commits adultery, and she with whom adultery is 
committed, shall surely be put to death.'- 

Dr. Alford's correction does not seem ad- 
visable ; and A. V. is best. 

Ver. 44. 

" Bless them that curse you, do good to them 
that hate you" — " despitefully use you, and/' 

" Omity^ says Dr. Alford, without giving the 
English reader, for whom he is constructing the 
text, one word, either of apology or of explanation 
for so summary an injunction. 

This wholesale dealing with the sacred text 
can only puzzle, unsettle, or alarm those who, 
from want of knowing better, conclude they are 
to obey such peremptory orders issued from the 
decanal seat of learning. Let them, however, feel 
quite comfortable about it ; they may keep their 
own favourite text, and obey it in perfect peace. 
* Thom. Mag. s. v. • Lev. xx. 10. 

ON S. MATT. CH. V. V. 47. 113 

It is hardly worth one's wliile to discuss tlie 
reason that makes the Dean " agree with Lachm.^ 
Tisch., and Treg., in expunging these words 
here."^ Good; but then, in this case, since S. 
Luke, vi. 27, sq., gives almost the same words, 
which of the two Evangelists was inspired, if this 
verse be here thus shorn in this way p Without 
further going into the matter, we may think the 
authority of some of the oldest MSS., and that of 
the Peschito, Armenian, Ethiopic, A. Saxon, Ara- 
bic, Georgian, Slavonic, and Gothic versions, at 
least equal to that of the Coptic version which 
is younger than the Syriac, and to that of the 
Codd. Vaticanus and Sinaiticus, in favour of a 
text quoted by S. Chrysostom* and by Justin 
Martyr,' whose authority Dr. Alford does not 
mention, either here or at S. Luke, vi. 27. 

" The children," A.Y., ''render the sons," Dr. 
A. See above, p. 108. 

Ver. 47. 

" Do not even the publicans so ? '* A. Y. In- 
stead of *' publicans so," Dr. Alford says that " the 
oldest and best authorities have Gentiles the same." , 
Saying this, he ought, therefore, also to have said 
that the same authorities read " publicans so," in 
the preceding verse; as neither originals nor 

* In his Greek T. vol. i. p. 53. ^ Horn, xviii. in Matt 
* ApoL ii. p. 62. 


tranfllations have precisely the same expression in 
both verses. 

This is one of those cases in which, to use a 
familiar phrase, it is '' six of one and half-a-dozen 
of the other/' and which therefore is hardly 
worth a correction. The question is whether 
'' publicans so'' should be read in v. 46, and 
'^ Gentiles the same," in v. 47. So reads the 
Ethiopic v.; while the Armenian V. reads " pub- 
licans the same," at both places ; the Peschito, 
" publicans this," also at v. 46, 47 ; the Gothic, 
" heathens the same," and " publicans the same ;" 
the Coptic, '^ publicans this way (thus)," and 
" heathens this way (thus)." S. Ghrysostom alao 
reads '' publicans the same," and '^ heathens the 
same," v. 46, 47; while Justin Martyr says, 
w6pvoi and rtXtivai, whoremongers and publicans. 
If, therefore, the change be thought of sufELcient 
importance, " heathens " may be substituted for 
"publicans," in v. 47, but not " Gentries," as the 
adj. 10vik6c, 'ethnic,' is not the same as the 
subst. TCL Wvti, the nations, or "the Gentiles." 
Mill,^ however, considers iOviKoi an interpolation, 
and says that teXCjvcu, 'publicans,' is the true 
reading in both verses. 

> Proleg. 888. 

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. 115 


" That ye do not your alms before men,'* A. V., 
for " ahm^^ read " righteousness," Dr. A. 

Here, again, the Dean gives no reason what- 
ever for his alteration ; so that the English reader 
is left in total ignorance of it. In a note, indeed, 
he says, that it is not to be understood in the 
sense of " benevolence " or " ahm^'' but in that of 
righteousness, aa in oh. v« 20. He does not, how- 
ever, say that there we find SiKaioavvii^ 'right- 
eousness, but here cXeq/iocrvvq, 'alms.' And so 
read together with the Received Text, several good 
MSS. ; the Peschito, that reads here iXei^fxoirvvnv 
and SiKaio<TvvriVy at v. 20 ; the Gothic, Georgian, 
Coptic, and the Ethiopic, while the Arabic, Ar- 
menian, and Slavonic, read " not show your com- 
passion.'' S. Chrysostom, also reads iXerifiofrvvriVy^ 
and discourses upon it ; so that, even though Cod. 
Vatic, read SiKaioavvriVy instead of iXeri/notrvvnv, 
which Dr. Alford says is " a mistaken gloss, the 
general nature of this opening caution not being 
perceived," 2 yet may we keep to the Received 
Text in company with S. Chrysostom. 

Whether, however, we read ScKaeocHivi} or IXctj- 
fio<yvvri matters little; the meaning is much the 
same. For SiKaiotrvvn has in the New Testament 

' Homil. six. in Matt. * Greek T. voL L p. 55. 


many significations, chiefly deriyed from its we- 
ceptation in the LXX., where it is often put for 
npi», " almsgiving," and also " righteousness,'' and 
for ion, iXcocy mercy, Ac. But for 1 John, ii, 29, 
iii. 7, 10, where righteousness, iiKouxrvvn, cannot 
be taken in the sense of ahnsgiving or of mercy, 
one would have thought that wouiv Suzaio<r6viiv 
could not mean anything but "doing alms;'' 
" doing," or " working righteousness," properly 
so said, being l/oyaZ^ecrOai SiJcacoir6vf}v, as in Acts, 
X. 35 ; Heb. xi. 33, &c. 

When, however, Dr. Alford says that Sucaeo- 
(fuvrif in the sense of showing mercy and giving 
alms, is not found in the New Testament, he must 
have overlooked such passages as ra yvviifxara 
TfiQ SiK. vfiu)v, * the fruits of your righteousness,' 
being — irrKopirKnv, eSa>K€ roig wlv., fi Sue. avrov 
filvH Big Tov al^va,^ 'he hath dispersed abroad, he 
hath given to the poor; his righteousness re- 
maineth for ever,' &c. So far, however, fi^om 
reading here SiKaio<Tvvriv in the sense of ch. v. 20, 
S. Chrysostom rather speaks of the matter men- 
tioned before this verse as Ixcfvi} yap ri e/JirpoaOev 
t\pTi\fiivr\, TOV 0€oi; Itrnv iXcTj/iocW/vij, * the alms- 
giving, or mercy, before mentioned, is that of God*' 

Ver. 4. 

" Himself shall reward thee openly," A. V. 
Some of the best MSS. omit ** himself" and 

» 2 Cor. ix. 9, 10. ' Hqinil. xix. in Matt. 

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 12, 13. 117 

**x>penly" here and at v. 18, says Dr. Alford. 
On the other hand, these words are well sup- 
ported: "himself" by several MSS., but espe- 
cially by the Peschito and Latin versions ; while 
** openly" is found in a far greater number of 
MSS., and most of the old versions. So that no 
alteration is necessary. 

Ver. 12. 

*^ As we forgive," A. V., " readhsLve forgiven," 
Dr. A. 

The Dean grounds his alteration on the read- 
ing ajtriKafieVf which is not nearly so well sup- 
ported as the Received Text, dj^Uinev, " we for- 
give." Not only is this the reading adopted by 
a great number of MSS. — though not by Cod. 
Vatic. — but also by the Ethiopic, Gothic, Arme- 
nian, Coptic, and Sahidic versions, and S. Chry- 
sostom ; while other MSS. read d^lofievy another 
form of the present; whereas only three MSS. 
and of the Old versions the Syriac alone, read, 
"we have forgiven." We may, therefore, keep 
to the Received reading. 

Ver. 13. 

*' For thine is the kingdom, and the power, 
and the glory, for ever. Amen," A. V. 

" Omit/' says Dr. Alford ; and in a note, adds, 
" We find absolutely no trace of it in early timesy 
in any femily of MSS., or in any expositors." 



Without entering upon the controyersy of this 
doxology, I will simply remark, — 

(1.) That S. Ghrysostom not only has it, but 
discourses upon it ;i so that, unless we doubt the 
authenticity of this homily — and there is no 
ground for so doing — he must have had good 
reason for what he wrote. 

(2.) That it is found in the Peschito, Gothic, 
Armenian, Ethiopic, Arabic (Fayyum and O. 
Sion.), Persian (Whel. and Pol.), Slayonic, and 
Georgian versions. 

(3.) That it exists almost whole in the Sahidic 
version, though the Coptic omits it; as do also 
the A. Saxon, Wycliffe, and Tyndale. So that 
in such good company, we may keep that to which 
they were accustomed, as well as we ; for, seeing 
there is so much to be said on both sides, the 
advantage of Dr. Alford's proposed alterations 
would assuredly be far less than the confusion 
caused by this needless change in the English 

" Openly,*' A.V., 
See above, at v. 4. 

Ver. 18. 

says Dr. Alford; 

Ver. 23. 

" How great is that darkness,*' A. V., ^^remkr, 
How dark is that darkness," Dr. A. 

* Homil. zix. 6, in Matt. 

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 25, 27, 28. 119 

" Why ? The Greek to aKorog Tr6<Tov, means 
" the darkness of what greatness or quantity ; " 
wherefore is the A. V. a good rendering of the 
Grreek ; but if any alteration were made, " how 
thick is that darkness,'' would be better than 
" how dark is that darkness." IIoo-oc occurs in 
the same way in 2 Cor. xii. 11. Iloinjv <nrov8i?v 
rendered "what zeal" in A. V. and left unal- 
tered by Dr. Alford in his Revised A. V. ; why 
not on the same principle alter it there to " what 
zealous zealP" "What eager, or earnest zeal," 
however, would be better; but, as no change is 
required at 2 Cor. vii. 11, so also here may 
A. V. remain as it is ; since it renders the Greek 
literally, and is well understood. 

Ver. 25, 27, 28. 

" Take no thought," A. V., " render take no 
anxious thought," Dr. A. 

If the words of the A. Y. could be misimder- 
stood, then some such alteration as that proposed 
by the Dean would be necessary; but, as they 
are perfectly clear here, so are they also at Phil, 
iv. 6, where the same Greek term rendered, 
" Be careful for nothing," A. V., is by every- 
body understood to mean " be full of care " for 
nothing. Yet, so far from there being any doubt 
as to the meaning of, " take no thought," this ex- 
pression is quoted as an authority for "to be 
solicitous," in Webster's Dictionary. And rightly 
too, for it is so used in Shakspeare : 

120 REMABKs^ Era 

" Mer. All lie can do 

Is to himflelf ; take thought, and die for Caesar.^' 

It isy however, interesting to notice how the 
kindred versions render this verse. The Gbihie 
has, m maumaith nu; lit. Do not mourn now; 
and uses the same word at v. 27, 31 ; while, at 
V. 28, it has hva saurgaithy "what care ye?" 
WycliflPe, "that ye ben not besie to your lif;*' 
Tynd., "be not carefull for youre lyfe;" A. S.^ 
" Dhset ge ne sin ymbhydige eowre s&wle," that 
that ye be not anxious, careful, or solicitous, &c. 

Ver. 27. 

" One cubit to his stature," A. V. ; " render to 
his age," Dr. A. 

One cubit to one*s " age " is not very clear, 
neither is the Dean's correction to be commended. 
'HXiKfa, from riXiK6Q, * how great,' * how much,* 
• how long,' or * how large,' means " the size of 
the body ;" riXiKla, to /u^koc, 17X. is * the length,' 
says one Gloss; 17X. ^iyeOoQ tnljjJLaro^y jxirpov ri 
-qX. is the size of the body ; a certain measure. 

The same term is, of course, used, especially 
by Attic writers, to mean the size or propor- 
tion of life, i.e, " the age of man." Here, how- 
ever, that rikiKla is to be taken for "stature," 
and not for " age," seems settled by the use of 
irrixo^, * cubit,' as measure; inasmuch as it is 
customary to use measures suited to the thing 

' Jul. Csa. Act ii. sc, 1» 

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 31. 121 

measured. No one measures Kquids by the yard, 
nor stuffs by the bushel ; but length by length, 
and time by time. If, therefore, riXiKla were to be 
taken here, as the Dean proposes, for " age," in- 
stead of " one cubit," we should have one month, 
one year, &c. Thus fifteen years, and not fifteen 
cubits, were added to Hezekiah's life. Moreover, 
TiXiicla must be taken in the sense of " stature " 
in Luke, xix. 3, where it is said of Zacchsous, 
who was " little of stature ;" and also in S. Luke, 
ii. 52, where Dr. A. does not alter " stature " 
into " age," albeit other critics understand it of 
age and not of " stature." At S. John, ix. 23, 
however, fiXtKia means age, for the growth of the 

It is almost needless to add that the Dean's 
alteration of " stature " into " age " in this verse 
did not occur to any of the translators of the Old 
versions, nor yet to S. Chrysostom, who under- 
stands it of the nourishment and growth of the 
body, i.e. of " the stature " thereof. 

Ver. 31. 

" Take no thought," A. V. ; " render take not 
anxious thought," Dr. A. 

The Dean probably meant " take no anxious 
thought ;" " no " is, strictly speaking, an adjec- 
tive, " not," however is an adverb. " Take not," 
therefore, means " do not* take," which is better 
English ; whereas " take no anxious thought " 


means ''take no thought that is anxious;" and 
this is the obvious meaning of " take no thought." 
This is Airther proved by the fact that, in order 
to make grammar of " take not anxious thought/' 
one must introduce " an " before " anxious 
thought." And so we find it in Shakspeare; 

" K, Hen, Hence I took a thought, 
This was a judgment on me ;"^ 
and — 

" CcBS, Take to you no hard thoughts ; 
The record of what injuries yoa did us, 
Though written in onr flesh, we shall remember 
As things done bj chance ;"< 

expressions which entirely bear out the above 
remarks. A philosophical grammar of the Eng- 
lish language, on the plan of many excellent 
works of the kind for almost every other Euro- 
pean language, would be a great boon to many, 
who are at present left to their own thoughts 
and instinct in the matter. 

Ver. 34. 

" For the things of itself," A. V., read " for 
itself," Dr. A. 

This proposed alteration, that will not be very 
soon adopted, rests on the Dean rejecting ra 

* K. H. VIII. Act ii. Bc. iv. ' Ant. and Oleop. Act. v. sc. ii. 

ON S. MATT. CH. VI. V. 34. 123 

[^Xprifiara] after fjLcpiiJLvfiarnre, on tlie strength of 
some MSS., and thus, probably, making far worse 
Greek of it than need be. 

MEpifivatOf i.e, lupL'jxvawy simply means that 
the thoughts or the mind are divided; whether 
(1) ' by care for a particidar object/ 

. tpyov jMpifJLvC>v TTotoVy r\ fitov rlva ;* 

* engaged in what work, or in what pursuit in 
life/ or (2) more seldom by ' doubt or trouble ;' 
for when Plato talks of XctttoJc fiepiiJLv^v,^ * trou- 
bling oneself very little/ he does not mean to im- 
ply any great anxiety. Mepi/iv^v is thus, strictly 
speaking, a neuter verb, "to trouble oneself or 
" to busy oneself in thought " or in deed ; and 
when it occurs in classic authors, and that is but 
seldom — once only in Sophocles, Demosthenes, and 
Xenophon — it is either construed with the accu- 
sative or with the case governed by the preposi- 
tion following ; thus in Xenophon,* ^epifiv. irepi 
rwv, ic.r.X. In the LXX. it occurs only in the 
sense of " take thought," " dwell upon," or " care 
for," or " consider," Wisd. xii. 22, and of busying 
oneself " with a calling," Prov. xiv. 25, as in the 
line just quoted from Sophocles. It is then con- 
strued either with the accusative or with a pre- 
position and the case governed by it, whether 
genitive or dative. 

» Soph. (Ed. R. 1124. « X. Rep. 607. • Memor. i. 1, 14. 


Moreover, in fjupifivritrH avrficy Dr. Alford's 
reading, one may well doubt whether it does not 
strictly refer to the avptov aforesaid, and not to 
this av/ofovy morrow, itself. So that, although it 
be the same thing in fact, yet is it not certainly 
so in grammar; wherefore do some MSS. read 
lavr^C* "itself," instead of avr^c» which in this ob- 
lique case may be "it," and not "itself." K, 
therefore, ra be thrown out after fupi^vritrei, inpl 
or virl/o must be introduced before atrr^c to make 
good Greek of it. But better let things be as 
they are ; the change is not worth the trouble it 
gives ; for whether it be " the morrow shall take 
thought for the things of itself," or " the morrow 
jBhall take thought for itself," means pretty much 
the same thing. In all these cases the only 
change needed, if so be " take no thought " won't 
do, is to render fiij fiepifivfitrnre, &c., by " trouble 
not yourselves ;" which is the exact equivalent of 
the Greek in familiar English. 

But why does not the Dean alter " take no 
thought" in this verse to "take no anxious 
thought," as in the preceding verses ? The Old 
versions render idiomatically, the morrow will 
take thought either "of itself" or "of its own 


ON S. MATT. CH. VII. V. 29. 125 


Ver. 15. 

" Beware of false prophets/' A. V. ; ''render 
but beware/' Dr. A. 

Here is tbe Dean right. 

Ver. 29. 

** The scribes," A. V. ; '* read their scribes," 
Dr. A. 

This alteration rests on the addition of avrutv 
after ypafifiareigy on the authority of several MSS. . 
It is, however, left out in many others, as well as 
in the Coptic and Armenian versions. The Syriac 
reads " their scribes and Pharisees ;" the Coptic 
Sahidic, Ethiopic, A. Saxon, and Arabic, read 
" their Scribes ; " while Wycliffe has " as the 
scribes of him, and Pharisees ; '* and Tyndale, 
"and act as the scribes.'' 

The alteration, however, from " the scribes " 
to " their scribes " is quite unnecessary ; inas- 
much as the Received Text, oi ypafifiarng, " the 
scribes," is perhaps the better Greek of the two. 
Whose were the scribes if they were not their 
own ? Therefore is the addition of the pronoun 
entirely useless ; and ol ypafifiaTBiQ, " the scribes," 
is alone found in S. Mark, i. 22. 



Ver. 12. 

" But the children of the kingdom/' A. V. ; 
** render, but the sons of the kingdom," Dr. A. 

What, only sons and no daughters P Surely 
the Dean could not be in earnest when he wrote 
this. Yiof, thus in the plural, in Hebrew and in 
Hellenic Greek, means " a progeny, race, family, 
tribe," therefore, sons and daughters, men and 
women. "The children of the kingdom" is a 
correct rendering of the Greek ; and is also ap- 
plicable to the Jewish nation, evidently alluded 
to in this place ; which was not all made up of 
men. 2 Cor. vL 18, with Jer. xxi. 1, and Bev. 
xxi. 7. 

Ver. 15. 

He " ministered unto them," A. V. ; " read 
him," Dr. A. 

S. Chrysostom, the Gothic, and Arabic (Fay- 
yum) versions, with some MSS., read "him;" 
while the Peschito, Ethiopic, Armenian, Coptic, 
and Arabic Pol., read " ministered unto them ;" 
that is most likely to have been the case. For 
our Saviour was not alone there, and most as- 
suredly Peter's mother-in-law would with Peter's 
wife wait on the whole company, including our 

ON 8. MATT. CH. VIII. V. 28. 127 

Saviour and her son-in-law. Dr. AKord, how- 
ever, wrongly quotes the Armenian version both 
in this verse and at ch. vii. 29. 

Ver. 16. 

"With his word," A. V. ; "with a word," 
Dr. A. 

Perhaps better ; especially when compared 
with S. Luke, vii. 7, to which the Dean refers. 
WycMe has "by word;" Tyndale, "with a 
worde ;" Gothic, waurda, " with a word " or " by 
word ;" Syriac, " with the word ;" so also Coptic ; 
Armenian, " by word ; " Ethiopic, " with his 
word ;" and Sahidic, " by the word of his mouth." 
So that after all the Authorised Version agrees 
with versions of the fourth, and perhaps of the 
second century. For clearly the word with which 
He cast out devils must have been " His " word. 

Ver. 24. 

"Insomuch that the ship was covered with 
the waves," A. V. ; ^^ render was being covered," 
Dr. A. 

A better rendering. 

Ver. 28. 

"Of the Gergesenes," A. V.; "of the Gada- 
renes," Dr. A. 

This is probably the correct reading ; as "Ger- 


geea " is not known, whereas " Gktdara " is. Of 
the old versions the Armenian, Ethiopia, Coptic, 
Gothic, Arabic Pol. and Fayy. read "Gerge- 
senes ;" the Peschito, " Gudarenes ;" the Sahidic 
and A. Saxon, " Qerasenes," as if from Gerasa ; 
Wycliffe, " Genazereth ; " and Tyndale, "Ger- 

Ver. 29. 

" Jesus, thou Son of God,'* A. V. ; « omit 
Jesus," Dr. A. 

Our Saviour's name does not indeed occur in 
the Cod. Vat. and one or two more ; but it is 
foimd in very many others, and in the Peschito, 
Sahidic, Gothic, Armenian, Ethiopic, and Arabic 
versions ; the Coptic alone omits it. So that here, 
as almost always, we may in such good company 
keep the name of Jesus, the Name which is above 
every name, even when uttered by devils. 


Ver. 2. 

" Thy sins be forgiven thee,*' A. V. ; " omit 
thee," Dr. A. 

Here again the reading of the A. V., which is 
that of the Received Text, is far better supported 
than the other. All the Old versions read thus. 

ON S. MATT. CH. IX. V. 2. 129 

6z:cept the A. Saxon ; and Dr. Alford must have 
overlooked the Ethiopic when he says that it 
reads otherwise. On the other hand, S. Chryso- 
stom reads with the Cod. Vat., " thy sins be for- 
given/' omitting <rot, thee. Assuredly, the Eng- 
lish reader need not make himself the leaat 
uneasy about such questions, and the reading of 
the A. V. may remain as it is. For not only has 
it great authority, but the emphasis is also much 
greater ; " thy sins be forgiven thee '' being so 
far, more pointed than *' thy sins be forgiven.*' 

Nay, we may well suspect a mistake of the 
copyist in changing trol into <rov ; for there is 
something lame in cKftiiovrai trov al afiaprlai, inas- 
much as ai a/uLaprlai here must be rendered " thy 
sins," so that <rov is hardly necessary. But <rot 
is required after a<jii(ovrai. In proof of which, at 
V. 5 and at S. Mark, ii. 9, we have only a(l>i(ovTai 
<roi ai afiaprlai, *to thee are forgiven the (thy) 
sins,' that must be rendered, "thy sins be for- 
given thee,'' as well as in this place. Likewise 
a^£C avT(j) Koi to l/iaTiov, * give him thy cloak 
also,' &c., and at S. Mark, iv. 12, koi dfjteOy avroXq 
ra a/iapTri/MiTa, 

On the other hand, not a single instance oc- 
curs in the New Testament of af^lr\fu in the 
sense of " forgiving sins," without the dative 
after it of the person to whom the sins are re- 
mitted. So that while the genitive of the person 
whose sins are remitted is not necessary so long 
as the definite article- qualifies the term " sins," 



flu afULfyrlai — the dative, is indifipensable after 
ii^liifu. Whence we may conclude that the read- 
ing of the Brcceiyed Text is better Greek than 
that of the Cod. Yaticanus, and that the criticism 
is not sound that rejects a reading because it is 
** generally received," and adopts another only 
because it is in the Vatican MS., the exact date 
of which, after all, cannot be determined. 

Ver. 8. 

" They marvelled," A. V. ; " read were afraid," 
Dr. A. 

Here again is the Dean's alteration grounded 
on a reading in the Vatican MS., l^oj3?i0T}crav 
for iQaifxavav. The Received Text, however, is 
well supported ; not only by many MSS. but also 
by S. Chrysostom,* the Armenian, Ethiopic, and 
Arabic versions, while the Peschito, Coptic, and 
Sahidic, read " were afraid ;" the Gothic, " feared 
wondering ; " and the A. Saxon, " reverenced 
Him," or " were in awe of Him," 

Both readings, however, come very much to 
the same thing, for they could not marvel at Him 
without a certain degree of awe. 

Ver. 12. 

" He said unto them," A. V. ; " omit unto 
them," Dr. A. 

* Homil. XXX. in Matt. 

ON S. MATT. CH. IX. V. 13. 131 

This is not of the slightest consequence. The 
reading of the A. V. is supported by a number 
of MSS. and by all the Old versions, except the 
Sahidic and the A. Saxon. Dr. Alford cannot 
have read aright the Ethiopic when he quotes it 
as omitting " unto them," for it has the words. 

Ver. 13. 

" But sinners to repentance,'' A. V. ; " omit 
to repentance," Dr. A. 

This is the same kind of alteration as the pre- 
ceding one. Both readings are well supported, 
though "to repentance" is left out in the Vatican 
MS. and a few others, as well as in the Gothic, 
A. Saxon, Peschito, and Armenian versions ; but 
it occurs in the Coptic, Sahidic, and Ethiopic. 
Here, again, the Dean cannot have read aright 
the Ethiopic, which he quotes as omitting the 
reading ; while he did not look at the Sahidic, 
which has the words " to repentance." They are 
all good authorities ; and this shows what a waste 
of labour it is to work at unsettling one's mind 
and that of others by the fruitless attempt to settle 
such a question as whether St. Matthew originally 
did or did not write these words — seeing they are 
found in S. Luke, v. 32, and are there said to be 


Ver. 16. 

" The rent is made worse/' A. V. ; " render 
a worse rent is made/' Dr. A. 

This may be an improvement, and a better 
rendering; although A.Y. is also correct. 

Ver. 35. 

" Among the people/' A. V. ; " om«^/' Dr. A. 

This rendering in English first appears in 
Tyndale's version. It is not found in the Sahidic, 
Peschito, Gothic, Arabic, Coptic, and A. Saxon 
versions; but it exists in the Armenian, Georgian, 
Slavonic, and in the Ethiopic, which, here again, 
the Dean must have overlooked, in saying that 
it omits the reading. According to him it is not 
found in the three oldest MSS., though it is sup- 
ported by very many. 

Ver. 36. 

"They fainted," A. V.; ''r^arfwere harassed/' 
Dr. A. 

This alteration rests on the Received Text 
IfcXeXufclvoi, "faint" or "weary," being replaced 
by l(TKv\^ivoLy " harassed" or " worried," which 
is a somewhat uncommon term, and is, therefore, 
supposed to have been explained by the more 
usual word, which gradually crept into the text. 
The Gothic reads afdauidai, kXcAvfilvot, "faint- 
ing;" A. Saxon, gedrehte, troubled or vexed; Wy- 
cliffe, " thei were traveilid;" Tyndale's, " they were 

ON S. MATT. CH. X. V. 4. 133 

pined awaye ;" Syriac, "wearied ; '* Coptic, "wan- 
dering and scattered abroad;*' Sahidic, "were 
$eullei and scattered abroad," using the Greek 
term, an authority which Dr. Alford overlooks ; 
Armenian and Ethiopic, " wearied and scattered 

The authorities seem to be in favour of ItricvX- 
fdvoi, harassed or troubled, tired or weary ; as in 
Herodianus, <rKv\ag Sc ical vjipttrac,^ after weary- 
ing, worrying, or harassing and insulting the 
troops ; and %va St| /ut| iravra rov (rrparbv xrKvXy,^ 
* that he should not weary the whole army.' If 
an alteration be made in the Greek text, and thus 
also in the A. V., since the term used is supposed 
to refer both to the multitudes being weary of 
the way and wearied out by the Pharisees and 
Scribes, instead of " they fainted," one might per- 
haps adopt, "they were wearied." But "they 
fainted " is well enough understood. 

Ver. 4. 

** Simon the Canaanite,'* A. V. ; " Simon the 
Gananaoan," Dr. A. 

The A. V. reads as if Simon was a Canaan- 

* Lib. Tii. p. 149, ed. Steph. 

^ lib. iv. See also H. Stephen's remarks on rxvXXtt in his 
pfefaqe to Herodianus. 

134 REMARKSj £TC. 

ite, inhabitant of Canaan ; which is not the niiean* 
ing of the term. It most likely stands here for 
" 2ielote8," i.e. one of the Zelots, a nmnerous sect 
among the Jews, who called themselves followers 
of Fhinehas, in his zeal for the law, and took the 
law in their own hands. Nevertheless, neither 
Kavavtrtic nor KavavdioQ seem regularly derived ; 
Kawlrtic and Kavvmoc apparently being more 
correct. One circumstance, however, deserves 
notice ; the Syriac, whence Kavavlrri^, Kaw/riic» 
or Kavavdioc, is derived, reads here Qanonoyd; 
whereas in S. Luke, v., and Acts, i., it renders the 
Greek ZijXciTijc by the equivalent thannono. How, 
then, did the translator understand it here ? 

Ver. 10. 

"Nor yet staves," A. V. ; "Nor yet a staff," 
Dr. A. 

Better on all accounts, the singular, pa^Sov, 
being better Greek, and better grammar in Eng- 
lish. And so read most of the Old versions. 

Ver. 19. 

" But take no thought," A. V. ; " But take 
not anxious thought," Dr. A. 

See above, ch. vi. v. 25, p. 119 sq. 

Ver. 23. 

"Ye shall not have gone over the cities,*' 
A. V. ; " Te shall not finish the cities," Dr. A* 

ON S. MATT. CH. X. V. 39. 135 

This is a more literal rendering of re\i<rnrs, 
yet not so clear as the rendering of the A. V., 
which expresses the Greek, that the Apostles 
would not have ended their preaching among the 
cities of Israel when the Son of Man came. 
Whereas " to finish a city, or cities," may have 
more than one meaning. 

Ver. 39. 

" He that findeth — that loseth," A. V. ; read 
" hath found— hath lost," Dr. A. 

It is not so certain that the second aor. evpwv 
may not be rendered by the present ; the first 
aor. airoXiaaQ, however, is more definite in point 
of time. Hence this passage is read differently 
by the several versions ; thus the Gothic, Arme- 
nian, Wycliffe, and Tyndale, read like the A. V. ; 
A. Saxon, "he that met (found) his life — he that 
loseth," with which agree the Syriac and the 
Coptic ; while the Ethiopic reads " hath found-— 
hath lost." This tense, however, can hardly 
apply, as Dr. Alford would have it, to the time 
when he that shall have found (this life) shall 
lose (the next), and he that shall have lost (this 
life) for His sake shall find (the next). Besides, 
TJjvxVf ' soul,' though often taken for " life," need 
not be so understood in this place. 

We have examined all the alterations pro- 
posed by the Dean in the first ten chapters of 


8. Matthew. It seems but fair to him tliat yre 
should also look at a chapter or two in the other 


Ver. 1. 

" See, what maimer of stones and what build- 
ings are here ?^' A. V. ; " render See, what great 
stones and what great buildings ! ^' Dr. A. 

If the Dean had considered the matter, he 
probably would have written otherwise, and would 
have rendered here as everywhere else — John, iii. 
1 ; S. Luke, i. 29, &c. — woraTrog, by "what man- 
ner of,'* and thus have let alone the reading of 
the A. Version. 

Uorawog is indeed rendered "qtmntus de rebus 
et qualis, i.q, troXog de personis ;"* but also, and 
more correctly, is TrorairoQ, " qualis de rebus," as 
in this place. For norairSg — which is a degene- 
rate form of TToSaTToc, "of what soil, or coun- 
try, or kindred*' — means "what manner of.*' 
To TToraTTOQ 8l, itrri TrorawoQ rov rpoirov' ^pvvi\ogy 
^/oovc/ioc iiruiKfig, IIoraTrcJc means " of what 
manner is," say, Phrynicus P prudent, gentle ; 

» Wahl. CL N. s. y. 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIII. V. 1. 137 

JQ^V ovv ovTwg ipwr^v TTotifc T?c <foi Soke? eivaty^ 
f'aad ttus/' says Nunnesius, "must I ask the 
question when I wish to know what manner or 
what sort of a person so-and-so appears to be." 

IIoSaTroc* then, which is the correct form, 
answers to ct{/as, qualis. T(g, ijv 8' iyw, koi TroSa- 
TToc ; Evijvoc, B(t>ri, (S ^wKpaTBQy TLapioQ,^ * Socra- 
tes cum rogaretur, cujatem se esse diceret, mun- 
danum inquit, totius enim mundi se esse incolam 
et civem esse arbitrabatur.''* IIoSaTroc, says 
Thom. Magister,* Itti yivovg \iywv bpdwq bIttoiq, 
is rightly said of kind or kindred ; but when 
speaking "of what manner,'* irepl rov rpoirov 
ipwTwv ovTWQ ipBiQ' TTOTavog rov Tp6irov 6 ^wKpa- 
riic ; iiruiKriQ, ' Say thus, of what manner or what 
manner of man is Socrates P gentle.' Yet as 
TToraTToc is inferior Greek, koXXcov 8' av eiri to 
ovrwc ipwT^v, 67roi6g <roi riQ Sokbi elvai, rj irorairogy 
^ it were better to say, of what sort or manner so 
and so appears to thee to be, than to use TroraTroc-' 

The reading of the A. V. is, therefore, quite 
correct, and Dr. Alford's proposed alteration is a 
mistake. He quotes Josephus; it is, therefore^ 
singular that he did not notice what Josephus 
says, that the stones were not all " great,'' but 
that some were of diflferent shapes and kinds, and 
more or less ornamented ; the whole of which is 

' Schleusn. s. v. and Lobeck Fhrynichus, s. v. p. 56. 

• Apol. Socr. par. 4. * Cicero Tusc. 9. lib. v. 108. 

* P. 389, ed. Kitscbel. » lb. 


correctly rendered by " what manner of " of the 
A. Version. 

Ver. 2. 

" And Jesus answering said," A. V. ; " omit 
answering," says Dr. Alford. 

This summary injunction is again to be traced 
to the Vatican MS., in which the reading is not 
found; but it is found in many of the Old versions 
and in some MSS. ; and as it does no harm here 
we need not reject it. 

Ver. 4. 

*'When all these things shall be fulfilled," 
A. V. ; " read and render when these things are 
about to be all fulfilled," Dr. A. 

We demur to this. (1) MiXXeev does not 
necessarily mean '* to be about to do," or " on 
the point of doing;" on the contrary, while it 
points to the future, it rather implies delay than 
haste; and implies " futurity" by implying " de- 
lay." Thus— 

fiaKpa /xlXXcr', aWa raxvvare'^ 

So little is fjiiWeiv *' about to," that we have 
in Antigone, 611 — 

TO r eireira, koI to /xIXXov, 
KOI TO irpiv iirapKEtTEi, 

» (Edip. Col. 218, 1627, and Philoct. 1449. 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIII. V. 6. 139 

where ro /xlXXov is yet farther off than cTrctra, 
' deinde/ and comes after ifc. 

Tl julXXcrc;! *why do you delay? 'says Clytem- 
nestra to her attendants ; for jiaKpov ro fxiWuv,^ 
* to be " about to," is a long time coming,! ' Fur- 
ther examples are needless to show that fxiWuv 
implies delay, and that, therefore, " shall " of the 
the A. v., which only points to the future with- 
out specifying the time, is more correct than Dr. 
Alford's "about to be." » 

(2) The Greek does not say when these things 
are all fulfilled, but " when all these things shall 
be ftdfilled." "AH" qualifies "these," and not 
" to be fulfilled," as Dr. Alford seems to under- 
stand it by placing " all " before " fulfilled," and 
not at its proper place, before " these things." 

Ver. 6. 

" I am Christy^ A. Y. ; "I am He, is more 
faithful;' Dr. A. 

"He" is not in the Greek, which simply 
means " I, I am ;" A^ or Christ being understood 
in this case. 'Eyco uyn is thus said very often : 
e,g. Acts, xiii. 25 ; S. John, i. 21, and viii. 24, 
&c. " I myself " being avroc tycJ u\iiy S. Luke, 
xxiv. 39. Since, then, " he " forms no part of 
the text, and must be understood as referring to 

» Agam. 908, 1858. * Bacch. 178, CEd. Col. 1074, &c. 
' On ^iXAiiy, see Lobeck's Farerg. to Phiyn. p. 747, sq. 


Christ, it is yery clear that " I am Christ,** A, V., 
is far plainer than '' I am he" which may refer 
to anybody. 

Yer. 9. 

" But take heed to yourselves," A. V. ; " ren- 
der Take ye — ye has the emphasis — ^let your care 
be," Dr. A. 

The construction in fall of iavrov, with the 
pronoun to which it refers, is so rare — and then, 
of course, in the same case — ^that we had better 
look at this sentence as if written v/ue?c Sc /SXlircrc 
iavTovQy as at t. 28, so as to lay the emphasis on 
vfuiQ ; in which case it cannot be rendered as Dr. 
Alford does. It should then be,. ^' But ye take 
heed to yourselves," and at v. 23, " But ye take 
heed." For since jSXIttctc is fully rendered here 
by '^ take heed," which is also like it made the 
second person plural by placing "ye" af^r 
" take," one then says, " Take ye heed to your- 
selves," that is, " Let no one else do so for you." 
But if " ye " is put at the head of the sentence, 
thus, " But ye," it means, " Let others do what 
they like; you, however, take heed to your- 

Ver. 10. 

" Among all nations," A. V. ; " render Among 
all the nations," Dr. A. 

We demur to this. (1) The use of the defi- 
nite article in Greek is, of course, often diametri- 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIH. V. 11, 12. 141 

cally opposed to tte English idiom. (2) In this 
case ra iOvri was consecrated to mean " the Gen- 
tiles,'' gentes, all the nations that were not Jews, 
and it is the meaning of it here ; so that " among 
all the Gentiles " would render the Greek in the 
sense given to ra Wvri by our Saviour in Hiw 
conversation with His disciples. But, since *^ the 
nations " in English has not the same meaning 
as ra Wvri in Greek, " all the nations " requires 
in English some such complement as "of the 
earth," " of the world," &c. On the other hand, 
" all nations " answers the purpose perfectly well, 
since it impKes all the nations of the earth, and 
no others. The same thing applies to such pass- 
ages as S. Matt, xxviii. 19, where " all nations " is 
a fit rendering for Travra ra lOvij. 

Ver. 11. 

. "And deliver you up," A. V. ; "to deliver 
you up," Dr. A. 

A better rendering. 

Yer. 12. 

" Shall cause them to be put to death," A. V.: 
" render Shall put them to death," Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford seems to forget that 0avaT6w means 
both "to put to death" and "to condenm to 
death," which is very much like " to cause to be 
put to death." Thus, in Themistocles, c. xxiv., 
Plutarch tells us that ^EirtKparrig 6 'Axa/ovcvc 
airiiTTBikev 8v iirl roirt^ Kifiwv varepov Kplvag iOa' 


varoiorev. In the same sense also, oSr<i> Si) rov 
Havcavlov OavariMtOivTog, * having been caused to 
be put to death/ t. e. by Themistoeles, on whom 
the suspicion rested.^ So also in Xenoph., /j.ri' 
iiva airoOvijiTKEiv avev rijc vfX^Tipaq i/;t)^ov, rdv 8* 
i^iM> rov Karakoyov Kvplovg ilvai rove rpiaKOvra 
davarovv.^ Oavaroia is also found in the same 
sense in Plato, IX. Leg., Antiphon and others ; so 
that the rendering of the A. V. is correct. 

Yer. 14. 

"Spoken of by Daniel the prophet," A. V.; 
" omit," Dr. A. 

This clause is not, indeed, in the Vatican 
MS., but is found in others, as well as in the 
Syriac, Georgian, Slavonic, and Ethiopic versions. 
So that we need not obey Dr. Alford's peremptory 
order to omit it. 

Yer. 19. 

" For in those days shall be affliction such as 
was not," A.Y. " For those days shall be afflic- 
tion such as hath not been," Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford's correction reads rather odd at 
first ; yet it is borne out by Eccles. ii. 23. 
" For all his days are sorrow, and all his travail 

But as regards the rendering of yiyove by 

' Ibid. c. xxiii. and Agesilaus, c. xxzii. 
' Hellen. lib. ii. c. iii. 51. 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIII. V. 20. 143 

" hath been/' it must depend entirely on whether 
yiyov£ was said with regard to the time when our 
Saviour spoke those words, or to the time when 
the affliction should happen. As it most likely 
refers, to the time when there should be affliction, 
" hath been " cannot be construed with a future 
tense, because the pret. def. ** hath been " must 
refer to a time present, when the action spoken 
of has already taken place. One cannot say, 
" To-morrow there will be a storm such as there 
has not been for months," since "hath been" 
ends to-day and at present ; and yet the question 
is about to-morrow; for between to-day and to- 
morrow another and greater storm may happen. 
One might, however, say, " as was not since the 
foundation of the world," because the indef. pret. 
" was," embraces all past tenses, especially in 
English, in which it is used idiomatically far 
oftener than in many other languages ; the same 
may be said of the second pret. yiyove, which is a 
sort of past present, and implies a thing done or 
completed, and which, therefore, is said to " be " 
at any time past, present, or future. 

Ver. 20. 

" Those days," A. Y. ; " the days," Dr. A. 

What days ? — Good grammar teUs everything; 
and if it leaves aught to be understood, it must 
be so grammatically. 

Here, however, whereas in rag rnuiipag, either 
ravrag may be understood, or rag may be taken 


in a demonstrative sense ; '' the " in English has 
a defining and distinguishing sense, though now 
no longer the demonstrative power of the article 
in Greek. Tclq vfifpaQ, then, may be said in 
Oreek ; but seeing it points to the days already 
alluded to, it must be rendered in English by 
" those days." 

" No flesh should be saved," A. V. ; « should 
have been saved," Dr. A. 

" Should have been saved " is a tense which is 
rather difficult to thread out in connexion with 
what comes before ; and *' should be saved," seems 
to answer the purpose, which is, to say that, 
imless those days had been shortened, no flesh 
should, or more familiarly, would ultimately be 
saved; whereas "should have been saved," can 
only be said relatively to the time preceding the 
days of affliction, and ending with them ; but it 
cannot, like " should be saved," embrace also the 
time that may follow. So that A. V. seems best. 

Ver. 25. 

"Shall fall," A. v.; "shall be faUing," Dr, 
A., rightly. 

Ver. 28. 

" Now learn a parable of the fig-tree. When 
her branch is yet tender," &c., A. V. " Now 
learn the parable from the fig-tree. When now 
her branch becometh tender," &c., Dr. A. 

ON S. MARK, CH. XHT. V. 28. 145 

At first it wotild seem as if A. V, "a parable/' 
were a bad rendering for rriv irapa^oXriv, Yet it 
is preferable to Dr. Alford's "the parable/' tbat 
starts on the unsound principle that the Greek 
article must always be rendered in English, but 
which here cannot make sense, without " which 
I have spoken,'' or " which I will now speak," 
for complement. 

The intention of the Greek, however, is " this 
parable," which would be a good rendering for 
rrjv wapa^oXriv in this place. Failing this, "a 
parable," that requires no complement, being 
indefinite, is best; especially as by being stated 
to be the parable which the fig-tree teaches, it is 
thus clearly defined. 'Atto is as well rendered 
"of," as irapa in "learned of the Father," &c. 
S. John, vi. 45. The reading of A. V., " When 
her branch is yet tender," however, is in one 
respect preferable to Dr. Alford's, "when now 
her branch becometh tender," although he is, 
perhaps, right in rendering here yivrirai, by " be- 
cometh." But he writes as if " now " qualified 
"when;" whereas ^8ij is said of aTraXoc yivnrai. 
" Now " is either conjunction or adverb of time 
very much like vvv ; but where it stands, in Dr. 
Alford's sentence, it reads like a conjunction, 
which is not the intention of ^Sij, that is best 
rendered "yet," said of the time at which the 
branch is, or becomes, tender. 

*' Ye know," A. V., v. 29, " read it is known," 
Dr. A. 

146 RKMAKKg, XTC. 

This is a singular rendering of yiv4t&tta% 
which can only mean " ye know," or " know ye." 

Ver. 30. 

'' Shall not pass/' A. Y. ; " shall not pass 
away," Dr. A. Better. 

Ver. 32. 

" But of that day and that hour," A. V. ; 
** but of that day or hour," Dr. A, 

This alteration comes from ^, "or," which 
is found in the Godd. Alex., Yat., and Ephr., 
instead of xat of the Received text. This Kal, 
however, which is the reading of S. Matthew, is 
also found in every one of the Old versions, one 
and all of which read here, " that day and that 
hour." Wycliffe alone has, " Treuly of that day 
or our;" while Tyndale reads, " but of the daye 
and the houre." 

" But of that day or hour," however, is not a 
correct rendering of wBpl Bi rrig -fiinipaQ sKelvrig 3 
Trig wpag : inasmuch as iKdvriQ relates to the day 
only, and not to the hour, as in English : this is 
proved by the article before hour, rijc &/t>ac> after 
which ainrrig is understood. " But of that day or 
of the hour" [in it], or more literally, though too 
familiarly, " but of that there day or of the 
hour," &c. Yet, since "hour" is evidently a 
portion of " that day," and not distinct from it 
in point of time, it is clear that ico(, "and," 
which restricts the event to that one momesit, is 

ON S. MARKy CH. XIII. V. 34. 147 

a mofe logical reading than 3, *' or." "No wonder, 
then, if all the Old yersions read " and," and thus 
aglree with A. V. 

" No man," A. V., " render for perspicuity 
none," Dr. A- 

Dr. Alford must surely mean "no one;" for 
"none" would not be so perspicuous as "no 
man." But " no one " is best ; though it matters 
very little. 

" Neither the Son," A. V., " read nor even," 
Dr. A. 

" Nor yet," would be better. 

Ver. 33. 

"Watch and pray," A.V. Dr. Alford en- 
closes [and pray] within brackets, saying that 
" it %% omitted in several ancient authorities.*' 

But it is found in Codd. Alexandr. and Ephr. 
though not in Cod. Vatic. It is also in all the 
Old versions and many MSS., as well as in S. 
Matt. xxvi. 41. With such authorities for it, 
what is the use of unsettling the mind of the 
English reader, who may doubt on reading this 
whether he need pray at all, so that he watches ; 
as if he could do the one without the other ? 

Ver. 34. 

" As a man taking a far journey," A. V., " the 
original has only going jfrom home," Dr. A. 

" Otoing from home," or " gone from home," 


would be aiTfTviu— av^/» awtov Ik 8«/nara>v*— or iic 
i6fiwv ;* whereas aTr6Srifio^y which is not of fre- 
quent occurrence, SicSnfcoc being preferable,^ de- 
rives its meaning from airoirifuiv, which means 
to go not " from home," i. e, the " house," but 
from the people or country into foreign parts; the 
difference between awufUf * to be absent/ and airo- 
SrifJuf, * to go away/ being beautifully drawn in 
aireifu S' wc ioUt rriiiupov — KaX yap — irpiwu /[ilX- 
Xovra ciccf (Tc airoST}/u€tv — Seao-KOircTv w^pii rijc airo- 
irifJttag^ — where it is said of a long journey — 
death, and what was to follow. 

IloT ytig airiSfifMi^ ; 

'To what part of the world didst thou gpP' 
said Hercules to his wife, who answers, lirc/Sa- 
Tcuov K\H<yOivei, * I sailed with Cleisthenes ; ' ica- 
vaviiiaxn<r€ig ; 'And thou didst fight at seaP'^ 
For a7roSi}/u^ci> is " proficiscor," and a7roSi}/ufa is, 
according to Phavorinus, Srav tiq Ik r^c irarpf8oc 
fic aXXoSaTTi^v inripxtrai — 'when one goes away 
from his own native land into another country ;'^ 
iirt (TTparetav arroSrifiriaaiy on foreign service;^ ug 
Xd)pav jxaKgav — ' into a far country.'® 

'A7r<J8»jjuoc here answers to aTroStiM^Vf ioi S. 
Matt. XXV. 14 ; the same parable as in S. Luke, 
xix. 12, where inroSniaCfv is explained by IwoptvOri 

» Eurip. Or. 662. « Med. 1147. 

' Thorn. Mag. s. v. * Phedo, p. 143, 146, dd. Lond. 

* Aristoph. Ran. 48, sq« ' Schleusn. 8. v. 

» -ffilian, Var. H. xxvii. about Plato. • S. Luke, xt. 13. 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIIT. V. 34. 149 

€tc X&pov fxaKpiiVy * he went into a far country/ 
So did Antoninus, when a7roSt}ju^<rae rijc 'FwfiriQ 
ri9i\ri<yEVy wg Sfj BioiK-qawv ra iv roig (TTparoTriSoigy 
KOI ra iOvri iiroypofiBvoQ, awapag Se t^c 'IrdXtac, 
hrl rs rate oyQaig rov "Iot/oov yevo/j^vog, k. t. X.,* 
* he planned to depart from Borne, in order both 
to set in order his various camps and to see the 
world ; having left Italy, therefore, and landing 
on the banks of the Danube,' &c. Or, as he 
would do of whom spake Socrates, — ottotb otto- 
Snfiotrig — oTT^re eXOoig elg rriv eKelvov — oTTcJre ekOoi 
^AOrivaZe,'^ or he to whom Plato alludes, who was 
to airoSrifiBiv koL cnriaeaOcu avxvov ypovov^ — 6c 
aTTcSii/iijcTf "xpovovg iicavovc,* * who went into a far 
country for a long time/ El 8' av olov airoSij/Lt^- 
<ra( BfTTiv o Oavarog ivOivSe Big aXXov roirov — 
at^iKOfuvog elg AiSov — apa ^avXq av €tij ri aTToSi]- 
/Ltfa. ' If, however, death is like departing hence 
to another place — ^when I reach Hades, and, being 
rid of unrighteous judges here — I there meet 
Minos and Bhadamanthua : will that be so bad a 
journey, after all?'* 

So then avOpwwog aTroSrifwg is something 
more than a man merely *^ going from home ; " 
oiKTiTiop /ulv &v iv 2kv/o(^, Iv Si r«{» irapovTi iff kripq 
iwoSrifitJv ljxiropl(^.^ Nay, the very passage (S. 
Matt. XXV. 41) referred to by the Dean, in con- 

* Herodian, lib. iv. p. 95, ed. St. 

' Memor. Socr. lib. ii. c. iii. 12, sq. 

* Politic, p. 665, &c. * S. Luke, xx. 9. 

* ApoL Socr. p. 363. * Dem. ir^ x»AX. p. 1345. 


fiimatian of his rendetrmg, proyes the oontruy ; 
nnoe it is rendered by S. Luke, zix. 12, *^ a man 
who went into a far oonntry." 

The Syriac and Ethiopia read, " who went on 
a journey/' and the Coptic and Armenian, ^ who 
went into foreign parts/' The AnthorLsed ver- 
sion, therefore, is right. 

Ver. 1. 

" After two days was the feast of the passorer, 
and of unleavened bread," A. V., " render the 
passover, and the [^fecKt of] unleavened bread." 
Dr. A. 

This proposed alteration is unnecessary, and 
the A. V. is quite right. 

It is, indeed, true that in Numb. xvi. 17, the 
Passover is mentioned first, on the 14th, and then 
the feast of unleavened bread, on the 15th day^of 
the first month. But it is equally certain that 
the term "Passover" is applied to the whple 
feast, in Scripture — ^whether or not, as S. Clwient 
Al. says, it was to be reckoned from the IQth 
day, when the lamb was chosen, to the 2l8t, and 
thus occupied the best part of two weeh^ ac- 
cording to Philo. Thus the Passover itseK is 
called " the feast " of the Passover, MDCn ^1, in 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 1. 161 

Exod. xxxiy. 25 ; fi iofyrfj tQv iZviifov, -fi Xiyofiivri 
mtcffxa, ' the feast of unleavened bread [which] 
is called the Passover/ S. Luke, xxii. 1 ; and 
the two were called ij kofyrri, 'the feast,* to 
Tra(T')(a fi eofyrfj twv 'lovSofoiv, * the Passover, the 
feast (not ' a feast,' A. V.) of the Jews/ S. John, 
vi. 4. 

Likewise does Philo speak of loprfj — ra Sm- 
fiarfipia, fjv oi 'E^pdioi watrxa K&Xovtnv — * the 
feast, " the passing through," which the Hebrews 
call the Passover,' virofivriTiKfi rrjc fiey(<rTrig inroi" 
Klag loTiv -fi BopT-fjy Koi \api(rTripiog'y 'that feast was 
instituted as a conunemoration of the great ex- 
odus, and is to be kept with thanksgiving/ Suv- 
airrei Si roig SiafiarTipioig eoprri^ — aZvfia; *but to • 
the Passover is attached (or, immediately follows 
the P.) a feast — the unleavened bread,' &c* 
Here, therefore, both the Passover and the un- 
leavened bread are alluded to, each as " a feast/' 
Hence, the custom among the Fathers of calling 
the Passover, ri iopT-fj rov ira<r)^a rov irporipov 
rvwiKov, vvv 8c aXriOivov,^ 'the Feast of the Pass- 
over, of the first that was tjrpical and of the 
present one, which is the true/ So that, as the 
Passover was " the Feast " of the Jews, is it also 
fl ^atrtXiaaa rwv ri/iipiovy ' the queen of days,' for 
Christians, says S. Gregory of Nazianzus.' 

When, therefore, the A. V. says, " After two 
days was the feast of the passover and of un- 

* De Sept. Festis, p. 1189, sq. 

• S. CyiiL Hier. Cat liv. » Orat. xlii. 


leavened bread, it speaks correctly, both as to 
fact, and also according to the usual idiom of 
those days. 

Ver. 2. 

" Not on the feast efcy," A. V. ; " render during 
the feast," Dr. A. 
A better rendering. 

Ver. 3. 

** And being in Bethany," A. V. ; " render 
when he was," Dr. A. 

Here also is A. V. best. "Ovroc, * being,' 
expresses a length of time during which tlie 
circumstances told took place; whereas "when" 
only points to the time or instant — e.g. "when 
the gun went off" — without implying any dura- 
tion whatever. If any alteration were necessary, 
it should be " while he was." Yet, " being " is 
literal, perfectly correct, and readily imderstood. 

Ver. 6. 

** For it might have been sold," A. V. ; " read 
for this ointment might," &c.. Dr. A. 

The principal MSS. and all the Old versions, 
except the Arabic, Pol., and Fayy., the Peschito 
and the Coptic read tovto to fivpov, " this [here] 
ointment ; to fiipov, however, is omitted, in those 
four versions, as well as in some MSS., and in the 
Beceived text. Here the Dean introduces it into 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 6. 153 

tke text, partly because it is found in S. Matt. 
xxvi. 9, wliile, as we have seen, he removes from 
the text of. S. Matthew the very words that occur 
in parallel passages of S. Luke. One is, indeed, 
sadly put out by all this shifting, the merit of 
which it is impossible to see. 

Surely these two places are not parallel. In 
S. Matthew, " ointment '' is only mentioned twice 
at V. 7; and in the 8th verse, we only have,—' 
"To what purpose is this waste?" (v. 9), "For 
this ointment might have been sold,'' &c. So 
that TO fivpov may well come after tovto, in S. 
Matthew. Here, in S. Mark, however, " oint- 
ment " would occur three times, at v. 3, 4, 6, if 
Dr. Alford's emendation were adopted. Surely 
one's ear has claims on the consideration of text- 
constructors ; and — " Why was this waste of the 
ointment made? For it might have been sold," 
reads assuredly better than " Why was this waste 
of the ointment made ? For this ointment might 
have been sold," &c. ; while the meaning of both 
readings is precisely the same. Here, then, also, 
is the A. y . best. 

" Three himdred pence," A. V. ; " read three 
hundred denarii," Dr. A. 

Alterations like this seem intended only to 
make one doubt the wisdom of the reviser. For, 
what do the people, for whom the common 
version is made, know of " denarii " or " dena- 
rius," either, albeit they have it in the " df." of 
" £. 8. d. ? " Whereas they know all about a 

154 uofABxSy Era 

pezmj, wliichy in tlie ITth century, answered well 
enough to the value of the ''denarius'' in the 
days of Tiberius, 7i^., to stand as an equivalent 
in the English translation. A labourer's wi^ies 
was then a penny a-day, as was a denarius in the 
days of our Saviour.^ The Saxon penig, which 
was derived from the Eoman denarius, was, ii; is 
true, worth only threepence of the present cur- 
rency; but the Eoman denarius greatly duni* 
nished in value towards the end of the Empire, 
and after that. So that anyhow, since ''penny," 
which originally meant caUle and money ^ was the 
Saxon equivalent for the Roman "denarius," it 
dearly is the best rendering for it, in a version 
intended for the people; irrespectively of the 
actual value of the penny at that time or at 

Ver. 8. 

" She is come beforehand to anoint," A. V. ; 
" render she hath by anticipation anointed," Dr. 

Yery little need be said about this. The 
A. V. is plain, Saxon, and true. Dr. Alford's 
"anticipation" looks very strange side by code 
with "hath" and other English words. lipo-^ 
IXa/3e fwptaai, moreover, could not be rendered 
better than "anointed beforehand;" but how 
could the woman do so without "coming" for 
that purpose? 

' Ackerm. Numism. HI. p. 8 ; Bibl. Numism. von C Cave- 
doni. lib. Ton Warlhof, p. 105, sq. 

ON S, MABK, CH. XIV. V. 10. 166 

Ver. 10. 

" One of the twelve/' A. V. ; " literally, the 
one, or that one of the twelve," Dr. A. 

This alteration rests on the insertion of the 
article before cic in the Vatican MS. 'O elc does 
not, I believe, occur, said thus absolutely; but 
always when mention is made " of two or more " 
of " the one and the other," &c. 6 elc . . . 6 cic ; 
b cic • • • 6 Sc inpoQy or aXKog ; ol Svo, 6 cTc • • • ical 
6 lr€/9oc. No instance of 6 cTc* as the Dean puts 
it, is found in the New Testament, neither does 
the Vatican MS. insert the article before elc in 
any of the following parallel passages, S. Matt, 
xxvi. 14, 47; S. Luke, xxii. 47; where cic rS>v 
&J&ica is said of Judas Iscariot. 

This one instance, then, looks more like an 
error of the Vatican copyist than like a true 
reading ; for it is not, I believe, good Ghreek. 
The expression, ical l^rikQ^v 6 cic air' ifiov, Gen. 
xliv. 28, at first seems to bear out Dr. Alford's 
reading, 6 cic; but it depends on Svo ctekc fioi 
4 yvirq: 6 cic iKri^OBv — "one of the two." So 
also ScJScica aSeX^oC iafiev — 6 cic ov virap\H' 6 Si 
fUKpog fura tov tt., ch. xlii. 32 ; which is like, 
dAw — ^<rav, 6 cic — 6 8a trtpog, S. Luke, vii. 41 ; 
but iio viol — elc «« 8. kcX elc tS eiwv S. Matt. 
XX. 21 ; S. Mark, x. 37. OJ irlvre ^amXeig iweaav, 
Koi 6 elc iarlv, 6 aXXoc oinru) ^X0e, &c.. Rev. xvii. 
10. The A. v., therefore, requires no alteration 
in this place. 


Ver. 14. 

" Where is the guest chamber P" A. V. ; " read 
my guest chamber," Dr. A. 

This also rests on iiov inserted after KaraXv/ia 
in the Vatican and other MSS. : though neither 
in the Alexandrine MS. nor in any of the Old 
versions, except, indeed, in the " Sahidic," says 
Dr. Alford. This verse, however, is neither in 
the Sahidic N. T. of Woide, nor in " Miinter's De 
indole Sah. Vers. ;" nor yet in Mingarelli's " Codd. 
Bibl. NaniansB." Perhaps Dr. AKord consulted 
some Sahidic MSS. ; if so, it would be well to 
have stated the fact. Likewise, does he quote 
the Armenian edition of Bp. XJskan ; but, though 
beautifully printed, it is, nevertheless, not to be 
trusted; as it was altered from the Vulgate. 
The best critical edition of the Armenian Bible is 
that of Venice, 1805, 4to. 

Dr. Alford adopts fiov here on the authority 
of the Vatican, Ephraem and other MSS, and of 
the Sahidic version, which he does not specify; 
while, at S. Luke, xxii. 11, where Cod. Ephr. 
and the Sahidic of Woide read to KaraXvfia fiov, 
he does not adopt fiov. Why then, here, and not 
there P Somehow this arbitrary handling of the 
Sacred text does not gain one's confidence. 
Surely, if to KaToXvfia fiov, ' my guestchamber or 
my lodging,' is so right here as not to require a 
change in the text, and in the A. V., common 
minds cannot see why, on nearly the same au- 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 15, 18. 167 

thority, it would not be quite as desirable in S. 
Luke, xxii. 11. 

Ver. 15. 

" There make ready for us," A. V. ; *' and 
there make ready," &c.. Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford inserts icat before licet, on the au- 
thority of the Vatican MS. and of the .Coptic, 
Gothic, and Ethiopic versions. On the other 
hand, the Alexandrine MS., the Armenian, Pes- 
chito, Georgian, Slavonic, and Arabic versions do 
not read icai, but agree with the A. V., that reads 
much the best. For " and " befpre " there make 
ready," does not suit the cadence of the verse. 
Dr. Alford, however, overlooked the Syriac Pes- 
chito, when he said that it inserts Kal; for it 
omits it. 

Ver. 18. 

" One of you which eateth with me, shall 
betray me," A. V. ; '* render one of you shall 
betray me, he that eateth with me," Dr. A. 

It is not easy to discover the merit of this 
correction; inasmuch as both renderings mean 
the same thing ; the A. V. being the clearer of 
the two. " One of you, he that eateth with me, 
shall betray me," might, perhaps, be more literal ; 
yet is no alteration required. 'O i(rOlo)v must be 
taken in a future sense ; unless we think that 
V. 19 took place while Judas, 6 lywjSaTrro/xfvoc, was 
dipping in the dish with the Saviour. 

158 SEMA&KS, ETC. 

Ver. 22. 

" Take, eat," A. V. ; " omit eat, as in all the 
most ancient authorities, and read, Take [this]," 
Dr. A. 

The mass of evidence is decidedly in fayonr of 
Dr. Alford's correction. Not only do most MSS. 
and all the Old versions omit "eat," but even 
Wycliffe has only ''Take ye;" while Tyndale 
gives : " Take, eat." This reading yet increases 
the difficulty of the question connected with the 
words of institution or consecration of the Eu- 
charist, which are differently given in the four 
places where they are mentioned; and that go 
to prove, says Bp. Jeremy Taylor, that Christ 
left us nothing definite on the subject. This, too, 
shows how wholly the matter lies between Him 
and the communicant; since four priests, admi- 
nistering the Holy Communion, according to 
Scripture, would do it in four different ways. 

Ver. 24. 

" Of the new Testament," A. V. ; " omit new ; 
better render in conseqmnce, covenant instead of 
testament," Dr. A. 

Here the same authorities do not favour the 
Dean. The Alexandr. MS. and others, together 
with the Sahidic, Peschito, Ethiopic, Armenian, 
Arabic, &c., except the Coptic, read " of the new 
covenant or testament," the word being the same, 
as in S. Luke, xxiL 20 ; S. Matt. xxvi. 28 ; and in 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 27, 31. 159 

1 Cor. xi. 25. Why tlien strive to prove the 
reading false in this place? 

Ver. 27. 

"Because of me this night," A.V. ; "(ww»Y," 
Dr. A. 

The Vatican MS. and many others omit this 
clause, " as taken from S. Matthew " (?) says the 
Dean. The Alexandr. MS. and others, however, 
together with all the Old versions, the Coptic of 
Wilkins (though not that of Schwartze) included, 
have it. Likewise Wycliflfe reads, " All ye shal 
be hurtt thorowe me thys nyght." The A. V., 
therefore, requires no alteration. 

" Scattered," A. V. ; " scattered abroad," Dr. 

Better, perhaps, as it is the same word as in 
S. Matt. xxxi. 31. 

Ver. 31. 

" K I should die," A. V. ; " render must," Dr. 

We should say not. " Should," not only in 
its original meaning, but in its present usual ac- 
ceptation, renders the subjunctive of Siy, which 
"must" does not; because it is not in English, 
conjugated, as in Icelandic and other Scandi- 
navian dialects, and is, therefore, of no particular 
tensa Thus, "if I must die," said thus abso- 
lutely, and without some adverb of time, means 
" if I must die now." Whereas, " if I should 

160 &SMABK8, Bra 

die," ''if it behoue me to dye to gidere with 
thee," Wycliffe ; " K I shulde dey with the," 
Tyndale — leaves the question as it is in Chreek, 
uncertain, conditional, and ftiture. 

Ver. 38. 

« The spirit truly is ready," A. V. ; "is wiU- 
ing," Dr. A. 

Better, perhaps, since the word is the same 
as in S. Matt. zxvi. 41. 

Ver. 45. 

"Master, Master," A. V. ; "render Rabbi, 
Rabbi," Dr. A. 

The change does not seem desirable. " Rabbi, 
Rabbi," means nothing for the common people ; 
whereas " Master, Master," which they all under- 
stand, and which renders the Hebrew Rabbi, 
" My Master, or Superior," conveys to them the 
meaning of the words spoken by Judas to the 

Ver. 47. 

" A sword," A. V. ; " render his sword," Dr. 

Right, and so reads the A. Saxon, " his swurde 

" A servant," A. V. ; " render the servant," 
Dr. A. 

Also best, for tov SovXov. 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. T. 48, 49, 51. 161 

Ver. 48. 

" Are ye. come out ? " &c., A. V. ; " Ye are 
come out,'' Dr. A. 

The punctuation in the Greek text is, of 
course, of Kttle authority. Of all the Old ver- 
sions, the Ethiopic and Slavonic alone read it as 
an interrogation, that seems also to read best in 

" Against a thief," A. V. ; " render a robber," 
Dr. A. 

A much better rendering. " Thief," A. Sax., 
iheof, is icXiTmjc, and robber, A. S., reafere, is 
Xyarrig; both agreeing in their respective ety- 
mology ; reafere, from reqf, spoil, as Xyarrig also 
from Xrfig and Xtj'/^o/xae. See S. John, x. 1, 8. 

Ver. 49. 

" But the Scriptures must be fulfilled," A. V. ; 
" render but that the Scriptures may be fulfilled," 
Dr. A. 

This rendering is more literal^ but not so 
correct in this place as that of A. V. The Dean's 
correction requires " but so it is," or " it is so," 
&c., as complement, to make sense ; whereas 
A. V. implies this, and conveys nearly the same 

Ver. 51. 

" And the young men," A. V. ; " read they," 
Dr. A. 



Dr. Alford tells us that the Received text in- 
troduces viavhKoi, from v€av/<ncoc in the former 
part of the verse, or from v. Kparovatv airov. 
This, however, is hardly probable. The reading 
is found in the Alexandr. MS. and several others, 
in the Gothic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Sclavonic, and 
Sahidic versions; the Coptic, Arabic, and A. Saxon, 
however, omit it ; while the Sahidic reads " the 
officers " for ol vsavi<rKoi. This is a familiar ex- 
pression in some Eastern languages, for ^'sol- 
diers." The reading, therefore, is not without 
authority, and may be kept. 

"Followed him," A. V. ; ''read with him," 
Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford adopts oi;vt)koXov06< for TiKoXovOu, 
on the authority of the Vatican, and one or two 
more MSS. ; but how could that yoimg man 
follow Christ with Him P The crvv, * with,' refers, 
in such a case, not to the person one follows, but 
to some other person with whom one follows a 
third. The only two instances in which avva" 
icoXov0av occurs in the New Testament prove the 
case. In S. Mark, v. 37, He suflTered- no one 
ovvaKoXovOriaaiy 'to follow Him together,' save 
Peter, James, and John ; and S. Luke, xxiii. 49, 
the women, ai (rvvaKoXovOrfaaaai avrt^f * who toge- 
ther followed Him from Galilee. ' 

Here, however, that young man followed alone, 
and, therefore, could not follow "with" Him. K 
avvriKoXovOet must be adopted, then render " fol- 
lowed Him with the rest of the band," &c. Alto- 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 53. 163 

gether, then, the Received reading i7JcoXoi;0£i is 

Ver. 53. 

" Were assembled with him," A. V. ; " render 
come together to him," Dr. A. 

The rules of grammar that guide the Dean in 
his renderings are not always clear. Here he ren- 
ders (Tvvip^ovrai avrd^ as if it were ep^ovrai, they 
come, ariv, 'together,' avrdf, *to Him;' but, besides 
that this very peculiar rendering would stand 
alone in the New Testament, we may doubt whe- 
ther epxeadai rivi, 'to come to some one,' be good 

"Epx'^f^Oai often is in the tragics construed with 
the dative, for to come "as a dream," to happen, 
ep^eral aoi iriKpov Oia/ia,^ ov <toi raS' ^\0e icaica,^ 
and in prose we find tpxeaOai Xoyc^,^ * to come to 
the point ;' but when said of one person coming 
to another, ip^ofiai is mostly construed with some 
preposition like tt/ooc, c. ace. or Itti, c. dat. &c. 
^vvip\ofial Tiviy therefore, always is "to come 
with some one else," even with the pronoun un- 
derstood, as avvipxofiai Ig j3ovX^v, ' I come to the 
council with [the others].' Thus TLirpog (rvvriX' 
Oev avTOLc* * Peter came with them;' avvriXOov 
avTt^J^ 'they had come with him;' the women 
(TuviXijXv Ovcai aitru^^ ' who had come with him ;' 

» Eurip, Op. 940. « Hippol. 838. 

^ Plato, X. Rep. p. 183. * Acts, in. 39. 

* Id. X. 33, 45. • S. Luke, xxiii. 55. 

164 REMARKS, £1X7. 

and so in every other instance. But in order to 
make the reading better Greek, as well as clearer, 
when <rvv{p\ofiai air^ is not intended to mean 
" to come together with him," but " to come toge- 
ther to him,'* then is <n)v(px'^<rOai construed with 
TTpoc airrov ; as in seyeral MSS. in this place and 
in S. Mark, vi. 33. Here, therefore, (rvvipxovrai 
avTfi^ must be rendered "they came together with 
him," unless we prefer the reading trvvipx- ^P^ 
airrov. The A, V. might, perhaps, be altered to 
" and with him assembled ;" as the histor. present 
may well be rendered in English by the preterit. 

Ver. 54. 

" Even into the palace," A, V. ; " render even 
within into," Dr. A. 

Hardly. ''Ewe fo'w «Jc rriv avXriv means " as 
far as the interior, into the hall of the high- 
priest." It is not, therefore, " even within into,** 
that reads somewhat rugged, but " followed him 
within, even into." This rendering is not literal ; 
yet, inasmuch as Isojg, * as far as,' refers to the 
innermost part of the building into which Peter 
went, " even" must in English refer to the hall 
of the high-priest, and not to "within;" since that 
hall was farther in than " within." 

"And sat," A. V. ; "and was sitting,** Dr. A. 


" And warmed himself,'* A. V. ; " and was 
warming himself," Dr. A. Also right 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V, 62, 68. 165 

Ver. 62. 

" In the clouds of heaven," A. V. ; " render 
with the clouds of heaven," Dr. A. 

"In" must in this place be taken to mean 
" on," as it often does now, and did yet oftener in 
A. Saxon ; e.g. " militant here in earth." Taken 
in this sense it is preferable to " with," as render- 
ing for )Lt£ra, which, if rendered " with," followed 
by the definite article " with the clouds," must 
mean " in company with them." This, however, 
is not the intention of the passage, which simply 
says that the Son of Man will come, borne on the 
douds of heaven. If, therefore, neither " in " nor 
" or " wiU do, and " with " is adopted, then rwv 
vf^cXfaiv must be rendered " clouds," without the 
article, "and coming with clouds;" because, 
when thus construed, " clouds " accompany Him, 
and not He them. 

Ver. 68, 

" I know not, neither understand ;I," A, V. ; 
'lender I neither know Him, nor understand," 
Dr. A. 

This alteration rests on Dr. Alford's reading 
ovrc o78a cure Marafiai, for the Received Text, 
ovK ocSa ovSl hrltrrafiai. Both readings are well 
supported ; the Received Text by the Alexandr. 


MS. and others ; and Dr. Alford's rendering by 
the Vatican MS. and one or two more. Other 
MSS. vary the negations. 

The only question of interest is, what does 
olSa refer to : to Christ, or to " what thou sayestP" 
Now it is self-evident that two connected nega- 
tions, "neither — nor," naturally refer to the 
same person or thing, unless otherwise expressed, 
e.g. "I neither know nor love him;" "I neither 
know nor xinderstand what thou sayest," &c. 
Whereas two difiPerent negations not necessarily 
dependent on each other, like " not " — " nor," 
may apply, the one to one person or thing, the 
other to another. Oiic otSa ouSi ivlfrrafiai means, 
therefore, " I know (perceive) not, nor yet under- 
stand what thou sayest;" or else, but not so 
naturally, " I know him, not, nor yet understand 
what thou sayest." So that Dr. Alford, by adopt- 
ing ovrc— ovrc, limits it to rf <n; \iyug ; whereas 
ouK — oh^i may possibly refer, the one to "what 
thou sayest," and the other to Christ. 

The Pesohito reads, " I know not what thou 
sayest;" the Coptic, oiSi — ov^l said of rl trv 
Xiyug ; so also the Gothic, Armenian, and Ethio- 
pic, while the Sahidic says in so many words, Dje 
ude andisoun ammoph an, ude andighn eredjo ammos 
an dje u, * that I neither know him, nor find out 
that which thou sayest, what it is.' 

ON S. MARK, CH. XIV. V. 69, 70. 167 

Ver. 69. 

''And a maid," A. V.; " and the maid," Dr. A. 
Of course ; since it was the same maid who had 
spoken to him before ; 17 ^aeSferici}, like ri 'irapOivog, 
S. Matt. i. 23, is definite. 

" Saw him again," A. V. ; " omit again," 
Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford rejects irdXiv as an interpolation ; 
but it seems to come naturally after 17 iraiSiaKti, 
*the maid,' showing that she was the one who 
had said so before, and now said it again. The 
Received reading and A. V. are both supported 
by the Peschito, Armenian, Slavonic, Georgian, 
and Ethiopic versions, as well as by the Alexandr. 
MS. and others. The Gothic version connects 
fraXiv with ^p^aro, which seems to be its proper 
place ; but the Coptic and Sahidic versions omit 
it ; and the Arabic and A. Saxon versions read, 
"and another maid saw him," &c. 

Ver. 70. 

" For thou art a Galilean," A. V. ; " render for 
thou art also a Galilean," Dr. A. 

Better; inasmuch as in koi yap, yap cannot be 
left out. We might, however, doubt whether 
" for thou also art a Galilean," is not better. But 
if it were so, perhaps should we then have icaJ yap 


roXiXacoc cT (r6, aa in the Coptic^ antok u Galileos 

" And thy speech agreeth thereto," A. V. ; 
" omit;' Dr, A. 

This clause, howerer, is supported by the 
Alexandrine and other MSS., and by the Old 
versions, except the Coptic and Sahidic. 


" And Jems entered," A. V. ; " render and he 
entered," Dr. A. 

As Jeam is in italics in A. Y. no one can mis- 
take it for an incorrect rendering. But being at 
the beginning of a chapter, seldom read in con- 
nexion with the preceding one, especially in 
church, Jeatia is well put there to introduce the 
narrative. K the two chapters were read together, 
and here .clcrcXflaJv were only rendered " he en- 
tered," it would refer to Bartimaeus, the last 
subject named« And if this chapter were read 
singly, no one would know who entered Jericho, 
unless Jems were said to be here alluded to. 

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 3. 169 

Ver. 3. 

" For the press," A. V. ; " render multitude," 
Dr. A. 

The A. V. is not amiss, but, on the contrary, 
it is well rendered here ; and in the parallel pass- 
ages, S. Mark, v. 27, 30 ; S. Luke, viii. 19. 

"OxXog implies two principal ideas : (1) a mul- 
titude of people, and (2) the thronging and jos- 
tling or pressing of the same ; hence 6)(\ei(r6ai aTro 
TTv. does not mean to have a multitude of unclean 
spirits within one, but to be knocked about and 
tormented by them, S. Luke, vi. 18 ; Acts, v. 16. 
Thus ©xXoc has a very different meaning in S. 
Matt. ix. 25, where it is put for the people that 
were in one small room ; and in ch. xiv. 5, where 
it is said of the multitude of which Herod was 
afraid, &c. Such a crowd thronged Christ, S. 
Mark, iii. 9 ; t. 31, &c., as on the present occa- 
sion, when it evidently was not the thousands or 
the hundreds of people that would hinder Zac- 
chseus from seeing Jesus; but, being little of 
stature, he might have been prevented from so 
doing by only twenty people around the Saviour. 
It was very much the same thing in the case of 
the woman who came through the press to touch 
the hem of His garment. Here, then, "the 
press " conveys the idea implied in ©xXoc, 8<ttcc 
£0Xc/3» rov K. ' the multitude that pressed the Sa- 
viour,' 8. Mark, iii. 9. 


Ver. 13. 

" His ten servants," A. V. ; " render his own 
ten servants," Dr. A. 

'Eavrov is in the Greek here ; and iS/ovc i^^ 3* 
Matt. XXV. 14, and there rendered " his own ser- 
vants;" so that it should be so rendered here 
also, if no number were given, as in S. Matthew. 
But seeing the iSioi SouXoi mentioned there are 
here limited to " ten," that tell how many were 
iavrovy "his own"; "own" is not necessary in 
English, because whereas " his " can only apply 
to the man himself, and " ten " says how many 
were his servants, the Greek construction here 
would hardly suffer another pronoun than kavrov ; 
as avToxf might refer to some one else, than to the 
master himself. "His ten servants," therefore, 
may remain ; " own " being implied in " ten," 
inasmuch as there were in the household many 
servants not " his own," but belonging to other 
"inembers of the family, or to the family in gene- 
ral. " His own" servants, however, were " ten" in 

"Ten pounds," A. V.; ''literally, minae," 
Dr. A. 

Exactly; but the conmion people would no 
more imderstand "minaB" for pounds, than 
" denarii " for pence. The object is not to give 
the exact amount in avoirdupois of the sum given. 

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 15. 171 

for even a " mina " would be somewhat difficult 
to calctdate ; but the object is to give the Eng- 
lish people a correct idea of our Saviour's mean- 
ing, in words they can understand. And they 
all understand pounds, shillings, and pence. 
" MinsB " and " denarii " are suitable for notes 
or commentaries, but not for the text itself. 

Ver. 15. 

" How much every man had gained by 
trading," A. V. ; " read and render what business 
they had carried on," Dr. A. 

A. V. is by far the better rendering of the two. 
AiairpayfiaTevo/nai occurs but seldom; once here 
and twice in the Phaedo of Plato, where Sm- 
frpayfjLaTevaaaOai tov Xoyov,^ means to treat a 
subject ; " pertractare quaestionem ;" or Siairp. rfiv 
alrlav,^ to discuss and examine a cause in all its 
bearings ; and when said of money, " to turn over 
money, to make money by trading with it." This 
is the meaning of it here, and not " what business 
they had carried on," for the lord did not care to 
know that, so much as to know what interest he 
would receive together with his money. 

Besides, the Dean, in his eagerness to find 
fault with the Received Text, even when, as in 
this place, it is borne out by the Alexandrine MS. 
and others of note, and by most of the Old ver- 
sions, not only rejects rtg, but also reads Siairpay 

» P. 327, ed. Lond. » Ibid. p. 310. 


fwrewiavTO — rt Siairpayfiart6<ravTO, thus waatonly 
spoiling the elegant and pointed oonstruction of 
the original cva yvdf tIq ti itairpayfiaTevaaTOi ' ut 
Bciret qms et quid lucratus fuerit;' ''that he 
might know who among them and how much 
every one had gained by trading." The rendering 
of the A. V. is, therefore, better than the Dean's, 
as the Beceived Text is also better Greek than his 
own, and, probably, nearer being " the "Word of 
God " he is trying to " discover.'' 

The Gothic reads wha tcharaizuh gavaurhtetU, 
*'what every one had wrought out, or made." 
The Syriac, " what every one of them had traf- 
ficked." The Armenian, "who, what he had 
gained," rfc rt Biavp. The Coptic, Arabic, and 
Slavonic versions, however, read with the Dean ; 
while the Georgian has " how much the money 
had increased." The Dean's reading is also that 
of the Vatican MS., while that of the Received 
' Text is the Alexandrine MS., which is, at least, as 
good as the Vatiban copy. 

Ver. 18. 

" Hath gained," A. V. ; *' render hath made," 
Dr. A. 

Hardly idiomatic, though here we have Ivotrias, 
while at v. 16, there is ^pofTBipyaaaro, 

Ver. 20. 

" And another came," A. V. ; " read the 
other," Dr. A. 

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 26. 173 

Here, again, the Dean reads 6 trepog, ' the 
other,' with the Vatican MS., and others that 
follow it ; while the Received Text very properly 
omits the article with the Alexandrine and other 
MSS. also. For 6 erepog can only mean *' the 
other " than the two already mentioned ; so that 
"the other" must be "the third;" but there 
were ten servants, every one of whom received a 
pound. " The other " cannot, therefore, mean the 
tenth, or the one, whoever he be, who hid his 
lord's money, since there were seven other ser- 
vants not mentioned ; it must be " another," one 
of the eight remaining after the first two 
already spoken of. 

In a case like this, the versions that use no 
article can be no authority, as regards the use 
of it in this place, e.g. the Vulgate renders 
6 SevTBpog, V. 18, and either 6 hepog or hepog 
here by "alter;" the Armenian, Slavonic, A. 
Saxon, and the Syriac read " another ; " the Ara- 
bic, probably revised on the Coptic, which has 
"the other one," reads "the other;" the Gothic 
has "some one;" while the Ethiopic, WycliflFe, 
and Tyndale, read " the third." \ 

Ver. 26. 

"Taken away from him," A.V.; "from him 
is omitted in many ancient authorities/' Dr. A. 

So it may be; but those ancient authorities 
are assuredly not free from error. For aw* avrov 
is clearly needed here ; and neither the sense nor 


the sentence are complete without it. Accordingly, 
it is found in the Alexandrine and other good 
MSS., and the Sjrriac, Armenian, Ethiopic, Oo- 
thic, Arabic, Coptic, &c. versions also have it. 
Nevertheless, in spite of such authorities, Dr. 
Alford thinks best to reject av airrov from his 
text, because the Vatican MS. does not adopt the 
reading. It is, indeed, difficult to see the merit 
or the object of such criticism. 

Ver. 34. 

" The Lord hath need," A. V. ; " literally that 
the Lord," Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford adopts on before 6 Kvpio^, to tally 
with V. 31 ; and also because it has most autho- 
rities in its favour. The addition is of no great 
importance ; yet are v. 31 and 34 not parallel 
At V. 31 the Lord said, " If any man ask you. 
Why loose ye the colt P thus shall ye say unto him 
[we do so] because the Lord hath need of him." 
Here, however, the disciples spake as of their own 
accord; &ti here being no part of the order re- 
ceived from their Master ; as in many like 

Ver. 40. 

" If these should hold their peace," A. V. ; 
" render shall hold their peace," Dr. A. 

'Eav, with the subjunctive friiayTrYitrwcriv, ren- 
dered " if they shall hold their peace," as if it 
were the indicative with h? Well might the 

ON S. LUKE, CH. XIX. V. 45, 46. 175 

stones cry out. The pret. indie, is, of course, 
right in the apodosis, therefore have we KeKpa- 
^ovrat ; but, as the protasis must be rendered, " if 
these should hold their peace," so must the 
apodosis in English be also in the subjunctive; 
as the same rules of syntax do not hold good in 
both languages. The A. V., therefore, is right. 

Ver. 45. 

" That sold therein," A. V. ; " therein is 
omitted hy many ancient authorities,^^ Dr. A. 

By the Vatican MS. and two more, and by 
the . Coptic and Armenian versions ; but it is 
sanctioned by the Alex. MS. and several others ; 
by the Syriac, Gothic, Ethiopic, Arabic, and Sla- 
vonic versions. The A. V. may, therefore, retain 

'^ And them that bought," A. V. ; " omit, with 
many ancient authorities, and the express testimony 
of Oriffen,'' Dr. A. 

This clause, however, is found in the Alex, 
and Ephr. MSS., with several others, as well as in 
S. Matt. xxi. 12 ; in the Gothic, Syriac, Ethiopic, 
Armenian, and Arabic versions ; so that the au- 
thorities are more than evenly balanced in favour 

Ver. 46. 

" My house is," A. V. ; " read and my house 
shall be," Dr. A. 

This is the reading introduced by Dr. Alford 


from the Vatican MS. The Received Text, how- 
ever, follows the Alexandrine and Ephraem MSS., 
with others also, and several of the Old versions, 
viz., the Coptic, Gothic, Syriac, Arabic, and Sla- 
vonic ; while the Armenian reads iirrcu, and the 
Ethiopic, " shall be called." 


Ver. 2. 

" He purgeth it," A. V. ; " render cleanseth," 
Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford's rendering is no better than A.V., 
for "to cleanse" a tree, is not a very common 
idiom. If any alteration were made, it should be 
" he pruneth it." But A. V., as it stands, is 
perfectly well understood. 

" That it may bring forth," A. V. ; " render, as 
above, bear," Dr. A. 

Rightly, for there is no reason why the same 
word should not be rendered alike in the same 

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 3, 5. 177 

Ver. 3. 

" Now ye are clean tkrough/' A. V. ; " render 
ye are clean already by reason of," Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford probably means, " Ye are already 
clean," &c., as the adverb qualifies the verb, and 
not " by reason of." But no change is necessary ; 
and I need not bring forward examples to show 
that riSi?, though it mean (1) " already," with 
respect to the time past, also (2) means " now," 
with respect to the time to come ; and (3) 
sometimes "now," conj. with regard neither to 
the past nor to the future ; exactly in the way in 
which "now " is used as conjunction in English.^ 
And such a conjunction is needed in this place, 
which begins, as it were, a new paragraph of 
application or address to the disciples. So that 
A. V. is right. 

Ver. 5. 

" For without me," A. V. ; " for apart from 
me," Dr. A. 

A very much better alteration by the late 
Prof. Scholefield is "severed from me;" "for, 
severed from me, ye can do nothing;" which is 
the real meaning of this passage. When the 
A. V. was made, however, " without " was often 
used for " outside," its true meaning ; and even 
now its usual acceptation renders this place suf- 
ficiently well. 

* See above, p. 145. 



Ver. 6. 

" And men gather them," A. V. ; " render and 
they," Dr. A. 

A. Y. is best, inasmuch /as, grammatically, 
" they " refers to " branches ;" but, as it does not 
80 intellectually, thence follows confusion of style. 
So that *' men gather," which exactly renders the 
idea implied in arvvayovtriv^ is best. 

" And they are burnt," A. V. ; " reneler and 
they bum," Dr. A. 

We should say not : Katofiai means, mid, 
" I am being burnt," i. e. " I bum," intrans. ; or 
it may be passive, for " I am lighted or burnt.'* 
And this seems here the intention ; not that the 
branches should go on burning, to give light like 
a lamp, or warmth, like fire on the hearth ; but 
that they should be consumed. Kaltrcu is here, 
then, in the sense of KaraKakrai, &c. — koi opq, &ri 
6 /3aroc KaUrai irvpl, 6 8l jSaroc ov icarcicafcro.* 
Therefore do many MSS. read KaroKaierai for 
KaUrai, in the parallel expression, S. Matt. xiii. 
40, which is the reading of the Received Text and 
of the Vatican MS., and is, nevertheless, rejected 
by the Dean. 

The remarks I made on this passage in my 
** Gospel of St. John," do not appear to me quite 
correct. I treated KaUrai, in the sense of icmo- 
fievog Xuxv., without suf&cient attention to the 
meaning of it here. 

' Exod. iii. 2. 

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 7. 179 

Ver. 7. 

" Ye shall ask," A. V. ; " read ask (impe- 
rative)," Dr. A. 

The imperative, which is not so ufigoal in the 
apodosis after lav with the subj. in the protasis, 
is, nevertheless, supported in this place by most 
MSS., and the Coptic, Gothic, A. Saxon, Arme- 
nian, and Ethiopic versions; and does, indeed, 
read better than the fixture. 

" What ye will," A. V. ; " render whatsoever," 
Dr. A. 

"O lav filXijrc, does not mean " whatsoever ye 
will," but "that which — what ye may will, or 
wish for." The Syriac reads, "All that you may 
like to ask for, shall be done unto you." " What- 
soever " is o n ov, V. 16. 

Ver. 8. 

" So shall ye become," A.V. ; " read and render 
and so shall ye become my disciples," Dr. A. 

A better rendering. Evidently, if the part of 
a disciple is to be like his master, then does the 
disciple of Christ become His, by growing like 
unto Him. But this is very slow work. 

Ver. 9. 

" Continue ye," A. V. ; " rendevy as below, 
abide," Dr. A. 


Ver. 12. 

" I have loved you," A. V. ; omit " have," 
Dr. A. 

The Ist aor. rrfairriaa is also better rendered 
" I loved," than " I have loved." 

Ver. 15. 

" Henceforth I call you not servants," A. V. ; 
" render no more do I call you servants," Dr. A. 

OitKiri is " no more," " no longer." The 
reading of the A. V., therefore, though not so 
literal as Dr. Alford's, has, nevertheless, the same 
meaning. The Gothic reads: Thanmeiths izuia 
ni qitha skalkam, " No more, or no longer call I you 
servants ;" A. Saxon only : N^e telle ic eow to 
theowan ; " I do not reckon you to servants." Wy- 
cliffe : " Now I schal not seye you servantis ; " 
and Tyndale : " Hence forth call I you nott ser- 
vauntes." The Old versions agree in rendering 
the Greek, " No more call I you servants, or my 
servants," &c. Correctly speaking of time, how- 
ever, it should be " no longer." 

** For the servant," A. V. ; " Because the ser- 
vant," Dr. A. 

Perhaps better. 

" For all things that I have heard of my Fa- 
ther I have made known imto you," A. V. ; "Be- 
cause I made known imto you all things that I 
heard from my Father," Dr. A. 

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 16. 181 

The Dean^s construction is that of A. Y. in- 
verted. A. V. is Kteral, and quite as intelligible. 

Ver. 16. 

" Ye have not chosen me," &c., A. Y. ; " Ye 
did not choose me," &c., Dr. A. 

The 1st Aor. i^eke^dfirtv is better rendered, not 
"I chose," &c., but " I chose you for myseK," mid. 

" Ordained," A. Y. ; " appointed," Dr. A. 

"EdrfKa may be rendered either way ; but the 
rendering of A. Y. is, perhaps, the better of the 
two in this place. 

" Whatsoever ye shall ask," A. Y. ; " omit 
shall," Dr. A. 

Then it would be the present subj. instead of 
the fut. indie. "O ri av aln^o-Tjrc — is " whatsoever 
ye may ask ;" av cannot be left out. 

Yer. 18. 

" If the world hate you," A. Y. ; " render 
hateth," Dr. A. 

Rightly, £1 — julkteX implies a certainty that 
should be expressed also by the indicative in 

" Ye know," A. Y. ; " better imperative, 
know," Dr. A. 

Perhaps ; it is, however, a matter of choice. 
Yet the Gothic, A. Saxon, and Wycliflfe, read it 
in the imperative, "wite ye;" while Tyndale 
altered it to ^' ye knowe." 


" It hated,'' A. V. ; retider " hath hated," Dr. A. 
A better rendering for lUfiltniKt. 

Ver. 20. 

"The servant is not greater than his lord," 
A. V. ; " render there is no servant greater than 
his lord," Dr. A. 

This at first looks like a singular render- 
ing of oiic ioTi \l<mvj Cod. Vat.] SouXoc fiei- 
Zwv Tov K. air., though it be the rendering of 
the Peschito, " there is no servant that is greater 
than his lord;" of the Ethiopic and Arabic ver- 
sions ; while the Coptic, Armenian, Georgian, and 
Slavonic, agree with the Gothic, A. Saxon, Wy- 
cliffe, and Tyndale, in reading, "The servaunte 
is not greater than his lorde." And this ren- 
dering seems justified by the parallel passages, 
S. Matt. X. 24, S. Luke, vi. 40, where iMlZtov is 
rendered irrip ; oiic i<m fmOrtvfie inrip tov S«Sacr- 
KoXov, oif^i SoOXoc inrip rbv Kipiov avrov, " the 
disciple is not above his master, nor the servant 
above his lord." 

" If they have persecuted," A. V. ; " omit 
have," Dr. A. 

The first aorist of this verse had better be so 

" My saying," A. V. ; " render word," Dr. A. 


" But aU these things," A. V. ; " howbeit all 
these things," Dr. A. 

ON S. JOHN, CH. XV. V. 22. 183 

** Howbeit " may, perhaps, be a better con- 
junction in this place than " but ; " yet is it a 
mere matter of taste ; and not worth the change. 

Ver. 22. 

"They had not had," A. Y. ; "they would 
not have had," Dr. A. 

This also is preferable ; yet is the change not 

"No cloke," A. V. ; ^^ render, for perspicuity, 
no excuse," Dr. A. 

The change, here also, is not necessary, inas- 
much as " cloke " is consecrated by occurring in 
this and other places in the New Testament ; and 
having thereby become a household word, is per- 
fectly understood. 

Ver. 26. 

"He shall testify," A. V.; '' rendsr bear wit- 
ness," Dr. A. 

Better. It is very evident, from the style of 
the A. v., that more than one mind worked at it, 
as e. $r. in the use of " testify " side by side with 
" witness," which is a much better term. 

Ver. 27. 

" Ye also shall bear witness," A. V. ; " render 
ye are witnesses," Dr. A. 

The A. v. "bear witness" — "ye also bear 
me witness" — underst. i^iol — might, perhaps, be 


better than " ye shall be witness/' For there is 
no future in Greek. At the same time fiafyrvpHn 
is in the present like t<m, though this refers 
to the past. This, then, should be altered to " be- 
cause ye are with me from the beginning," 
which is as idiomatic in English as in Greek. 
"And ye also bear me witness, because ye are 
with me from the beginning." 

These few chapters from the Gospels, in 
Greek and English, will enable one to judge of 
the kind of alterations the Dean of Canterbury 
would make both in the Received Text and in the 
English version of the Bible. In this first half 
of the New Testament for English readers, he 
gives the text of the Authorised Version so cut 
up with words and passages in italics, with 
clauses enclosed within brackets as doubtful, and 
the words " omit," " render," " read," &c., occur 
so often, with no explanation beyond the Dean's 
ipse dixit, that the English reader — for whom, as 
wholly ignorant of Greek and criticism. Dr. Al- 
ford prepared his work — must either turn aside 
from it, or think the Version he was taught to 
venerate a mass of corruption, and the language 
he ought to follow little else than an uncouth 
idiom, to be set aside and forgotten. 

In the latter half of the work, containing the 
Epistles, the Dean prints the Authorised Ver- 


sion unaltered, and his own Revised version, side 
by side in parallel colnnms ; an arrangement 
which is, on the whole, better. In order to do 
him justice, therefore, we will briefly examine the 
chief alterations he has made in the short Epistle 
of S. Paul to Titus. 



Ver. 1. 

*' An apostle of Jesus Christ," A. V, ; " An 
apostle of Christ Jesus,'* Dr. A. 

As I have not at hand Dr. Aiford's Greek 
Epistles, I do not know whether or not this be a 
translation of his Greek Text. But any how, 
the A. V. reads much better ; the cadence and 
rhythm of the sentence are better in " an apostle 
of Jesus Christ," than " of Christ Jesus ; " and, 
since the sense is the same, the advantage of the 
alteration does not appear. 

"According to the faith," AY.; "for the 
faith," Dr. A. 

icaro TTioTtv, ho\rever, is "according to the 


" And the acknowledging/' A* V. ; " and the 
knowledge," Dr. A. 

^Eirlyvwmg is more than " knowledge/' which 
simply means " acquaintance with ; " for it im- 
plies the act of the mind, which, being satisfied 
with the certainty of a lore of any kind, assents 
to it as true ; t. e. acknowledges it. Now, in a 
sensible man, such an act can only proceed from 
research and conviction, which are both implied 
in iTrlyvwaig. 

" After godliness," A. V. ; " according to god- 
liness," Dr. A. 

No great difference, though A. V. is best. 

Yer. 2. 

" Before the world began," A. V. ; " before 
eternal times," Dr. A. 

This, indeed, is a new reading in English. 
Xprfvoc, in Greek, is very seldom found in the 
plural; once or twice in Plato; in Sophocles 
also ; but never either in ^schylus or Homer ; 
and only once or twice in the LXX. ; very sel- 
dom in Demosthenes ; never in Aristophanes ; 
neither has it occurred to me in Aristotle ; but I 
have not yet read the whole of his works. 

The reason for which )(p6voQ seldom occurs in 
the plural is, that 6 Si )(p6vog ifrrt to apiOfiov* 
fi£vov, Kal ov\ i} apiOfiovfiiVf^ " time is not 
that by which we reckon, but that which is 
reckoned ; " hence xpovoc came to mean a period 
* Arist. Nat. Ausc. iv. 11, 8. 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. I. V. 2. 187 

of time — rlXcioc S' av uri xpovog, 8croi/ avOpwiroQ 
/3ioT^ — )(p6vo€ T<{icov-^a year, or a month, and, 
therefore, used in the plural ; e. g. 

1^ ^pog elg apKTOvpov eKfifivov^ '\p6vovg.^ 

* Six months from the spring to the autumn;' 
wpo Slica "XpovwVf rj fiera Slica IVtj,^ * ten " times " 
ago,' or after ten years ; therefore, also, are xpovo< 
said to be iroXacof, fiaKpoi, iroXkoty iKavoi, &c. 

fiaKpol waXaiol t av fierprfiutv xpovoi.* 

XpovoL aliivioiy however, is so unusual an ex- 
pression, that, even in the LXX., we have -^povoi 
alufvo^f Esdr. iv. 15, instead of it, inasmuch as, 
with regard to aicJv, taken for " the existence of 
the gods,*' Aristotle says that it is a word of divine 
origin, and that, rovro rovvofia ddwg e^Oeyicrac 
irapa riov ap^alijjv. To yap riXog rh irepiixov rov 
Trig eKatTTOv Z^co^c Xpovov — alojv licdoTov icIicXirrae 
— * the span of every man's life is said to be his 
seon, or lifetime/ Kara rov avrov Si \6yov Koi 
TO Tov wavTog ovpavov riXog kqX to rov navra 
'Xp6vov Koi rfjv aTTUplav wipiixov riXog aiwv loriv, 
aTTO rov aei elvai ukritf^tog Tfjv itrtavvfilav, aOavarog 
KaX flaoc.* " In the same way, seen (eternity), so 
called from dd, * always,' is immortal and divine, 
and embraces the end of the whole heaven, and 
the bounds of the whole time and of infinity." 

» Eth. Magn. i. 4, ft. » (Ed. Tyr. 1137. 

' Ammon. i. v. xat^ig. * (Fd. T. 561. 

^ Arifit. De Coelo, 9, U, 10. 


Clearly, then, every xpovog, or period of time, 
be it a year or a month, or a number of years, 
included in " ')(p6voiy^ cannot be aicJvcoc, itself 
" eternal," since it is, de facto, a measured period. 
Neither can xpovoe be literally rendered in Eng- 
lish; for "t^es,*' or "the times," is said in a 
yery different way ; so that " eternal times " re- 
quires some explanation, and, any how, is not 
i^omatic. Therefore, does the Dean render xjmJ-* 
vo(c aiwvloiQy Rom. xvi. 25, " during eternal 
ages ; " albeit, in 2 Tim. i. 9, he adopts " eternal 
times" instead of it. But the truth is, that 
aiiivioQ here is not ** eternal," but " of eternity ;" 
now " times, or years of eternity," are very much 
like eternity itself; so that, either "from all 
eternity," or "before the world began," &c., is 
quite as true as "before eternal times," and far 
more idiomatic. 

Ver. 3. 

" But hath in due times manifested his word 
through preaching which is committed to me 
according to the commandment of God our Sa- 
viour," A. Y. 

"But in its own seasons made manifest his 
word in the preaching, with which I was en- 
trusted according to the commandment of our 
Saviour God," Dr. A. 

These two renderings ought never to have 
been set side by side; leastwise by the Dean 
himself. For in the A. V. we have the most per- 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. I. V. 8. 189 

feet sequence of — subject [God] "hath*' — then 
the adverb, " in due times," qualifying the verb 
"manifested," and therefore placed before it; 
then the object, "his word," which is, therefore, 
placed after the verb. 

Whereas Dr. Alford says: But *'in its own 
seasons :" whose is " its," and where is the sub- 
ject P It is a frequent mistake to put the genitive 
before the subject, e. g. " his business being over 
the man came," &c., whose business — the man's, 
or that of some one else ? But here, " its own 
seasons " is made to relate to " word " that comes 
after "his" referring to "God" in the pre- 
ceding verse, so that the order is: (1) no subject ; 
(2) genitive of the object ; (3) no adverb, as " own 
seasons " belongs to " word " ; (4) the verb ; 
(5) the genitive of the subject which is not men- 
tioned, and (6) the object itself. Such grammar, 
though " revised," is assuredly not so good as that 
of the English version. 

" In due times," A. V. ; "in its own seasons," 
Dr. A. 

There is here an antithesis between ^ovoi 
aliovioi, and Kaipol i'Sioi, Kaipog being fxipog xpovov 
— rj TToiorijc XP^^®^' — " ^ portion or a quality 
of time." Granted, then, that Kaipoig, is 'sea- 
sons;' iSioig does not assuredly qualify \6yov avrov, 
as Dr. Alford seems to think, in "its own seasons" 
— but iStoig qualifies Kaipoig, as altovitoy does xpo- 

^ Thorn. Mag. p. 207, and Ammon. s. v. 


vufv, SO that KaipoiQ iStoic means " in due, or proper 

" Through preaching," A. V. " in the preach- 
ing," Dr. A. 

'Ev KtipvyfAarif may be rendered either " with, 
through, or in preaching," yet not " in the preach- 
ing." But since the word of God was not made 
manifest by the preaching of S. Paul alone, there- 
fore is there no article before KtipvyimTi ; for were 
it iv Ti^ Krip. 5 iirKTrevOrtv it would then imply that 
S. Paul's preaching alone was of the word of God. 
But since there were other apostles and evan- 
gelists who made manifest the word of God, Iv 
Ktipirffiari implies that fact and embraces the 
whole of that preaching ; and 8 imariidriv applies 
only to that portion of it which was committed to 
S. Paul. Therefore must it also be " through the 
preaching ;" ' the preaching ' being the means of 
making manifest the word of God. 

"Which is committed to me," A. V. "with 
which I was entrusted," Dr. A. 

There is, of course, no comparison between 
the flow of A. V. and the ruggedness of the 
revision. A. V. renders traparlQr^fjLi and irKXTsvoficu 
by "to commit to," which implies trust; and 
TTKTTevofiai by " to be put in trust," as im(TTevdriv is 
rendered in 1 Thess. ii. 4, and "committed to 
trust," 1 Tim. i. 11. As all these expressions are 
good renderings of the Greek, the choice lies 
between the better or the worse combinations of 
vowels and consonants. 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. II. V. 3. 191 

" Of God our Saviour," A. Y. " of our Saviour 
God,'' Dr. A. 

Nothing is gained by tliis very strange con- 
struction ; for of two substantives in apposition, 
the first qualifies the second : thus, " our family 
name" does not mean that "our family" is a 
" name," but it means that such a " name " is that 
" of the family." So that, as Dr. Alford cannot 
surely read the Greek as if it were " our Saviour 
God," that is, "our Saviour who is God ;" " God " 
in "Saviour God" is qualified by "Saviour;" 
and brings it to the correct rendering of the 
A. v., " of God our Saviour," whether this be 
said of the Father or of the Son. 

'O (Turrrip, ' the Saviour,' thus said absolutely of 
Christ, never occurs in the New Testament ; but 
either Qeog or 'Irjaovc Xpiarog is added, to show 
of whom (TtoTTip, which means both Saviour and 
Preserver, is predicated as an epithet, iwlKXrjmg, 
which, of course, never takes the article, except 
when the subject or noun has one also, as tov Aia 
Tov (Ttorripa^ So that the article in tov (ruyrripog 
rifiiov Qeov must refer to Geov, and not to o-cur^poc, 
as, e.g. in this line of Aristophanes — ^ 

TOV atJTtipog iepevg itv Aiog, 

that must be rendered " being priest of Jupiter 
Soter," or " Jupiter the Saviour." This is a very 
common epithet of " Zevg/' originally the same 
as " Geoc ;" but having become a proper name, it 

» Aristoph. Plut. 1186. » lb. 117.'i. 


is seldom found with the article, except when 
particularly specified, as in this case. 

There is, then, no difference between Upov 
<rwTi}poc iirUXriiTiv A(oc/ and Aiog iepov, iTrficXijo-iv 
(TwrripoQ ;* but in either case it is a temple of 
Jupiter, sumamed Soter, or Saviour. So that, 
whether we have rov awrripoQ r\fih}v Geov, as in 
this place, and in 1 Tim. ii. 3, Titus, ii. 10, iii. 4, 
as we have rov trwrripoQ Ai6g, and 

Tov Kara x^ovoc 

"AiSov v^Kputv (rurrripog,^ 

or read Gcov (rwrripog fifiiov, as in 1 Tim. i. 1, 
like Aiog (ruyrrjpog, which occurs continually — 
matters very little. In all these cases b-eurijp, in 
the New Testament, is an epithet, whether of 
" Saviour," for Christ, or of " Saviour " and 
" Preserver," said of the Father ; as e.g, inl Tim. 
iv. 10, where (rwrfip means " Preserver " of all 
men, specially of those that believe. Aristotle 
uses trtoTYip in precisely the same way : ^wrrjp fiiv 
yap ovTtjg awavrwv lorl koI yevirwp — 6 Geoc,* 
' God really is the Preserver and Father of all 
things ;' (rtjrrip te Xiyerai koi eXevOipiog, Brvjuuogy 
wg 8l TO wav eliniv, ovpavi6g re icat ^OSviog — 
TtavTiov avTog airiog &v f 'but He is called Saviour 
[or Preserver], and bountiful withal, from the 

* Fausan. Arcad. c. 30. * lb. Cor. ii. c. 31. 

3 ^sch. Ag. 13C0. '• De Mundo, 6, i. 

* lb. 7, 3. 

ON EP. TO TITUP, CH. I. V. 4. 193 

very nature of the case ; since, in one word, He 
fills heaven and earth, being, as he is, the Origin 
and Cause of all things ; ' <rvvlxwv rijv rwv oXtJv 
cLQfJLovlav Koi o-ftiTTjpfav,* * holding together the har- 
mony and preservation of the whole.' 

The A. Y., then, is right in rendering alike 
this and 1 Tim. i. 1, and the other parallel pass- 
ages, thus agreeing with S. Chrysostom. While 
the Syriac, Armenian, Coptic, &c., versions read 
both places (this and 1 Tim. i. 1) alike, " of God 
our Saviour ;" and the Gothic follows the Greek 

Ver. 4. 

" To Titus, mine own son," A. V. ; " To Titus, 
my true child," Dr. A. 

Tvr\<TLo^y said of a child, is opposed to voftoc, 
'bastard'^ — v69o^ yap el kov yvri<Tiog, *for thou 
art a bastard, and not legitimate.' 

Noflcji Si fifi elvai ayxiaralav 
walSwv 6vT(0v yvri<rlwvy^ 

' for if there be any legitimate children, illegiti- 
mate ones have no right of kin.' Fvijo-^oc waig, 6 
yov^t yeyovwc is also opposed, as by Demosthenes, 
to T^J TToiTjrc^, * to a factitious,' or adopted child. 
So that yvri<rlt^ riKvt^ cannot be " true " child, for 
this would be akriOy riKvt^, and Would mean not 
that the child was " genuine or legitimate," but 

> De Mundo, 6, 30. * Thom. Mag. s. v. nVn. 
» Aristoph. Av. 1650, 1654. 



that lie was "true," i.e. truthfiil. Then, again, 
rlicvov, which means child of either sex, said of a 
man, may well be rendered "son." So that 
yvfitrlt^ rlicvc^ means, here, "to my genuine or 
legitimate [child] son," yovcji ytyoviig, i.e. be- 
gotten through the Gospel, 1 Cor. iv. 15 ; Philem. 
10 ; 1 Pet. i. 3 ; and this is far better rendered 
" my own son," A. V., than " my true child," 
Dr. A. 

But Dr. Alford makes so many alterations in 
his Revised Version that I will only notice the 
principal ones. 

Yer. 9. 

" As he has been taught," A. V. ; '•' according 
to the teaching," Dr. A. 

Kara rriv SiSax^iv may mean either -the doc- 
trine of the apostles, or that which Titus had 
taught by their authority. In this case "the 
teaching " does not render rfiv SiSaxnv, because 
whereas fi SiSa^^ is here well defined, and was 
well understood by Titus, " the teaching " may 
mean any kind of teaching. 

" Be able by sound doctrine, both to exhort 
and to convince," A. Y. ; "be able both to exhort 
in the sound doctrine and to rebuke," Dr. A. 

" To exhort "may not, like "to convince," refer 
to the gainsay ers ; but kv ry SiSacricaXe^ must be "by 
or with sound doctrine," inasmuch as the sense of 
"to exhort in soimd doctrine" is not very clear. 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. I, V. 11, 15. 195 

Ver. 11. 

"For filthy lucre's sake," A, V.; "for the 
sake of base gain,'' Dr. A. 
A. V. is assuredly best. 

Ver. 14. 

" That turn away from the truth," A. V. ; 
*'that turn themselves away from the truth," 
Dr. A. 

'ATTOcrrpe^o/Lilvwv, though a middle verb, is well 
rendered by the neuter " to turn away ;" for " to 
turn oneself" means "to turn oneself round." 

Ver. 15. 

" But even their mind and conscience is de- 
filed," A. v.; "but both their mind and con- 
science is defiled," Dr. A. 

A. V. by aflBxing "their " only to "mind" looks 
upon "mind and conscience" as a compound 
substantive, and thus says, " is " defiled ; and so, 
does not exactly render the Greek which has 
icot 6 vovc ical Yi (TvvelSrimg. Dr. A I ford's render- 
ing is more correct in this respect; but not in 
writing " both their mind and their conscience is 
defiled ;" he probably meant to say " are defiled." 


Ver. 16. 

"They profess," A.V. ; "they make confes- 
sion," Dr. A. 

Why not say,"" they confess," if a change is 
necessary P But A. V. renders well Oeov 6/ioXo- 
yowiv ciSlvoc. Moreover, if Dr. Alford thinks 
"profess" a bad rendering here, why does he 
keep it in S. Matt. vii. 25, kqi rors o/ioXoY^o'ai, 
" And then will I profess unto them," &c.P 


Ver. 2. 

" Temperate," A. V. ; "discreet," Dr. A. 

If Aristotle* correctly describes rov trw^ova, 
A. V. is assuredly right. 

" Sound in faith," A. V. ; " sound in their 
faith," Dr. A. 

^Yyialvovrag ry ir(<rr«, is "sound in the faith." 
*' The faith " means " the faith once delivered to 
the saints," the Christian faith; "their faith" 
may mean anything they choose to believe. A. Y. 
omits the article, wrongly ; but Dr. Alford does 

■ Eth. Nic.iy. 14,8. 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. 11. V. 3, 4. 197 

not mend matters by introducing " their " instead 
of "the." 

" In charity, in patience," A. V. ; "in their 
love, in their patience," Dr. A. 

Neither charity nor patience could take the 
article, because neither is like " the faith," defined 
and limited to one kind ; but in rendering the 
article by " their," it means that the aged should 
be sound not in charity and patience as each vir- 
tue is in itself; but in the particular kind of love 
and of patience they choose to practise. 

Ver. 3. 

"Not given to much wine," A. V. ; " not en- 
slaved to much wine," Dr. A. 

A singular expression. Dr. Alford seems to 
forget that the first requisite of a Common version 
of the Bible is that it should be " understanded of 
the people." Now, if any alteration were neces- 
sary, "in bondage, or slaves to much wine" would 
be preferable to "enslaved to [by] much wine" 
But no change is needed. "Given to much 
wine " is quite clear and correct enough. 

Ver. 4. 

" To love their husbands, their children," 
A.V. ; " to be lovers of their husbands, — of their 
chUdren," Dr. A. 

This, too, falls oddly upon the ear. " Lover " 


is SO generally used as an adjective in the mascu- 
line that it seems to have no feminine. " To love 
their husbands/' &c., however, renders the Greek, 
and is assuredly more idiomatic. 

Ver. 5. 

"Keepers at home," A. V.; "workers at 
home," Dr. A. 

Dr. Alford here adopts the Alexandrine read- 
ing with preference to the Vatican, which is fol- 
lowed by the Received Text, olKovpovg, instead of 
oiicovpyov^, the Alex. MS. The Armenian reads 
" good managers " or " good housekeepers ;" the 
Coptic, " good managers ;" Syriac, " who manage 
well their houses;" the Ethiopic, "good tem- 
pered and manage well their houses." 

OlKovpog means " one who takes care of the 
house and manages it ; " and that it implies 
" keeping at home " is proved by these lines of 
Aristophanes : 

6 8' ?rcpoc oloc i(TTiv oiKOvpog fiovovy 
avTov fiivwv yap — * 

Ver. 9. 

" Exhort servants," A. V. ; " exhort bond ser- 
vants," Dr. A. 

Here and everywhere else ia the " Authorised 

* Vesp. 970sq. 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. II. V. 9. 199 

Version revised,'* does Dr. Alford print as of the 
text words that are not in it, as e,g, " exhort ;*' 
while he is at great pains to tell, in his notes, that 
the words printed in italics in the A. V. are not 
in the text ; a very gratuitous information, since 
the italics speak for themselves. This is indeed 
" constructing the text '* with the version thereof 
as well; and also treating the English reader with 
no great consideration. 

Here Dr. Alford renders SovXoc by " bond- 
servant,'* as also in Eph. vi. by "bondmen,*' 
giving his reason for it. Why, then, does he 
render iovXoi by "servants," in Col. iii. 22, a 
parallel passage to this ? and in Phil. i. 1, &c., 
where Paul and Timotheus are mentioned as Sov- 
Xo£, why not "bondmen" of Christ? The Dean 
renders this word either way, it appears, to suit 
his own convenience ; yet has the term SovXoc the 
same meaning everywhere. And the A. V. is 
right in rendering it " servant " and " servants," 
the question being not between " lords of life and 
death over slaves," but between "masters and 
servants," in all countries alike ; the social posi- 
tion of each depending on the custom of the 

If the Dean chooses to render SovXoc by 
" bondman," he must do so everywhere, and call 
S. Paul, Timothy, and ourselves also, "bondmen 
of God," " of the Lord Jesus Christ." He does 
not do so, because in such cases it would not be 
readable. But it is no wiser in the case of ser- 


vants ; for if the English reader of his Beyised 
Version happen to be a servant, he may naturally 
conclude that what refers to "bondmen" does 
not in the least concern him; so that he may 
"answer again, purloin, and be imfaithful;" as the 
apostle's words only apply to "slaves." Therefore 
does S. Chrysostom render SovXoc> in his Homily 
on this chapter, by olKirrig, * household servant,' 
throughout, and not " slave." 

" For the grace of God that bringeth salva- 
tion hath appeared to all men," A. V. ; " for the 
grace of God was manifested bringing salvation to 
all men," Dr. A. 

Here is the A. V. right. The construction of 
the Greek is ri xapig yap rov Oeov ri trwrripiogf 
cTTc^avij iratriv avOp. * for the saving grace of God 
appeared, or hath appeared to all men.' The 
original and the A. V. imply that the grace of 
God is trt&riipiog, * saving,' or salutary, under all 
circumstances ; and that it appeared or was mani- 
fested. Whereas Dr. Alford, rendering the ad- 
jective as if it were a pres* part., like wai^ovaa, 
makes " bringing salvation " an accident of the 
manifestation of that grace ; thus giving a very 
different sense to the passage. 

" Teaching us that, denying," &c., A. V. ; "Dis- 
ciplining us, in order that, denying," &c.. Dr. A. 

If the Dean wished to be literal, he ought not 
to have rendered iraiSeiovtra by "disciplining," 
for this would be ^aQrjfr^itovtra, His intention, 
however, is good ; and he seems right in under- 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. 11. V. 13. 201 

standing 7raiSevov(ra vfiag, tva, 'teaching, train- 
ing us so, that denying,' &c. Thus Plato, ravra 
8' iiroiet /3ovXofC€voc iraiSeveiv rovg TroXfrac, Jv' wc 
jScXr^oTwv airaiv apx'^h^ ^- 

Ver. 13. 

"Of the great God and our Saviour Jesus 
Christ," A. V. ; " of the Great God, and of qur 
Saviour Jesus Christ,*' Dr. A. 

I will not enter upon the controversy connected 
with this passage. Every one knows that the ren- 
dering adopted by Dr. Alford was made most of 
by the Arians of the fourth and following cen- 
turies. Wherefore do the Fathers, S. Cyril of 
Alexandria,^ S. Athanasius,' and others, read with 
the A. v., " of the great God and Saviour Jesus 
Christ," meaning that Jesus Christ is here the 
great God; at which S. Chrysostom asks — 11 ov 
Biatv oi Toif TlaTpog iXarrova tov Ylbv Xiyovreg ;* 
* Where are those who make the Son inferior to 
the Father ?" 

Dr. Alford seems aware of the unanimous opi- 
nion of the Fathers on this verse, but does not 
think it so weighty as his own interpretation. 
If, however, he had looked at the Greek he would 
have seen (1) that €?rc0av£m is never said but of 
God the Son ; and (2) that, in order to read the 

* Hipparch. p. 35. * Admon. in Gent. p. 6. 
' Cont. Ar. vol. p. 159 ; De Ess. P. F. S. S. p. 225. 

* In Tit. Homil. v. 


text as he does, it should have been rov fiBySiXov 
Seov Koi fov (TUfT. rifiwv 'Iijcroi) Xpttrrov ; whereas 
the absence of the article before awrfipog is con- 
clusive on this point ; showing that icai (rcur^poc 
I. X. belongs to rov imjoXov Qsov, and qualifies it ; 
making One Person of the whole. 

Even the Dean's MS., the Vatican, omits the 
article before o-oir^poc, giving here precisely the 
same construction as at 1 Tim. i. 1, kut iTrirajfiv 
Qeov (Fiorripog 7)iiC)v koi K. I. X., which Dr. Alford 
does not alter there (except in omitting "lord "), 
but follows the A. V. Why, then, not render the 
same construction in the same way here also, 
where even his favourite Vatican MS. fails him for 
his own rendering P 


Ver. 2. 

" To be no brawlers, hut gentle," A. V. ; " to 
be not quarrelsome, forbearing," Dr. A. 

As we saw above,^ the Dean makes no distinc- 
tion between the adjective " no " and the adverb 
"not." "No brawlers" means that Christians 
were not to be among such people ; " not quarrel- 
some " means that they were to be not quarrel- 

* See aboye, p. 119, sq. 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. III. V. 3. 203 

some, but sometliiiig else. The negative should, 
therefore, be put before the verb, "not to be 
quarrelsome ; " in either case, however, it requires 
a "but" after it; otherwise the " not " applies also 
to the following " forbearing." 

This " but " is not required with the Greek 
ajJLaxoQ, because this contains no negation, but 
only an a privative ; so that ifiaxog is treated as a 
positive term, ajJLa\ovQ elvai, to be diJ,axovg, * gen- 
tle,' &c. The negation " not," however, or the 
negative adjective "no," denies what follows, 
and turns the Greek order " to be dfiaxovg/' into 
the veto " not to be brawlers," &c., and thus re- 
quires a different construction, with "but" follow- 
ing, whether in Greek or in English, oiic fiXOov — 
aXXa ; ovk e<mv ifiov ^ovvai — aXka ; vjihq 8I ov\ 
ovTwg, aAAa ; ov yap oi aicpoarai — aAAa. 

From the nature of the case this antithetic 
construction with " but " cannot very often occur 
with ij,{i ; yet does it sometimes happen, e.g. fjifj Iv 
6<^da\jmoSovX£iaig — aXXa ; fjri wg kx^pov riy' — 
dXXa, &c. So also in English, " to be no brawlers, 
but gentle," A. V., is right. 

Ver. 3. 

" For we ourselves also were sometimes fool- 
ish," A. V. ; " for we ourselves also were once 
foolish," Dr. A> 

As in the former verse, so also in this does 
Dr. Alford seem to care neither for Greek nor for 

204 KE3(ABK8, ETa 

English. (1), Ilorl does not mean aira^, 'once»' 
but '^sometimes/' aliqnandoy nnqaam — opposed 
to fifiKOTB, * never.' Thus, speaking of the man 
bom blind, rov irorl Tv^\6vy A.V. rightly ren- 
ders it, " that aforetime was blind ;" a rendering 
which the Dean does not alter there. Ilorl is, 
however, well rendered, "once," at one time, 
in Bom. vii. 9, where the short period of man's 
innocence in Eden may be spoken of as of 
" once," when compared with the time that fol- 
lowed ; but irorl is well rendered " in times 
past," in Bom. xi. 30 ; a reading which the Dean 
also adopts. It is so rendered likewise in Gal. i. 
13, 23, and also " once," t. e. " at one time," &c. 
In English, however, "once," properly means 
"once, and not twice," and is only known by 
the context to mean " at one time," which "time" 
may have been of some duration. 

Here, therefore, does the A. V. render irorl 
correctly by " sometimes," for they were " fool- 
ish," more than once, and at various times ; 
whereas the Dean, by using "once," which is 
liable to misconstruction, but, especially by put- 
ting it before " foolish," instead of before " were," 
makes the Apostle say, " For we ourselves also 
were once foolish;" that is, not "twice;" inas- 
much as "once," thus prefixed to "foolish," 
qualifies it precisely in the same way as would 
"very;" "once foolish" being "foolish, once 
only," as " very foolish " is " foolish in a great 
degree." If the Dean wiU have "once," he must 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. III. V. 4. 205 

construe it thus: "For once we ourselves also 
were foolish," &c. But A. V. is much better. 

Ver. 4. 

"But after that the kindness," A. V.; ''But 
when the kindness," Dr. A. 

Here the Dean's rendering seems best, and 
most natural. 

" The washing of regeneration," A. V. ; "the 
font of regeneration," Dr. A. 

This, in sooth, is a strange alteration. Aov^ 
Tp6v means, in general, both " a bath or bathing* 
place," and "water used for bathing or wash- 
ing ;" a particular kind of swimming or plunging 
bath, however, was called (iaim<TTripiov, or KoXvfi" 
(ifiOpa; two terms which were adopted by the 
Fathers and other ecclesiastical writers, for a 
" baptistery," the place, bath, or vessel, in which 
holy baptism was administered in the Church. 
In English, however, " baptistery " is said only of 
the part of the Church set apart for that purpose, 
while the term " font," from " fons," is used for 
the vessel that contains the water used for 

But, inasmuch as (1) " regeneration," as it is 
here understood, does not depend on the shape of 
the vessel, or on the place, be it a river or a lake, 
in which a person is baptized, but on the washing, 
which is the outward and visible sign of that 
regeneration; and as (2), a "baptistery," or 


"font," is a species of "bath," \owp6v — not 
only may we not say " font " for Xovrpov, but 
must render it by the evident intention of the 
Apostle — washing. 

Ver. 7. 

" That being justified," A. V. ; " that having 
been justified," Dr. A. 

If Dr. Alford can prove that the justification 
once wrought does not either last to the present 
time, or was not lasting at the time then present, 
when the Apostle wrote, then is he right in 
rendering SiKaiwOdg as he does. If so, however, 
why does he render it by " being justified," and 
not by " having been justified," in Rom. v. 1, 
and what difference is there between the "justi- 
fication " aUuded to there and the "justification " 
mentioned in this verse ? 

Ver. 8. 

"And these things I will that thou aflirm 
constantly," A. V. ; " and concerning these things 
I will that thou aflBb:Tn constantly," Dr. A. 

The Greek sentence may be imderstood in two 
ways, either " as regards these things, I will that 
at all times thou use persuasive language," or, 
" I will that thou at all times persuade others of 
these things." If Dr. Alford's construction be 
adopted, then, assuredly must either " that they 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CH. III. V. 8. 207 

are so," or some suet complement, be added after 
" affirm constantly," inasmucli as " one affirms a 
thing," and not " concerning " it. But the A. V. 
is correct enough to require no alteration ; since, 
"to affirm concerning a thing that it is so," is 
the same as "to affirm the thing itself." 

" To maintain good works," A. V. ; " to prac- 
tise good works," Dr. A. 

One really would think that the Dean alters 
for the pleasure of altering. 

IIpo'/aTo/iai properly means " I place myself 
before," or " at the head," with a genitive of the 
thing, governed by irpo ; thus 7rpotoTa(T0at twv 
irpayiJLarwv,^ " to be put at the head of affairs ; " 
Trpoi(TTa<r0ai rwv 'EXXtjvwv* — Trpotora/icvof tov Srj- 
fjLov^ — those at the head of the people to protect 
and govern, and to provide for it ; irpotrravTeg tov 
irpayfiaTog* — Trpo(rTrivai Trjg elprivrig^ — all imply 
not " practising," but being at the head of affairs 
or of business, to see to, provide for, and maintain 
it. The sense, therefore, of irpoiaTatrOat KoXiov 
ipywvy is to be at the head of good works, fore- 
most in suggesting, doing, and forwarding them ; 
all of which are included in A. V., " to maintain 
good works;" while the Dean's, " to practise good 
works," looks like an oversight. 

^ Herodian. lib. vii, p. 162. ' Demosth. 

' Pint. Ljsand. 19. * Demosth. 

* iEschin. 


Ver. 10. 

"After the first — reject/* A.V.; "avoid," 
Dr. A. 

Uapairiojuai means both " to reject, renounce, 
avoid, and eschew ;" also "to excuse oneself." The 
rendering must depend on the sense put apon the 
Apostle's words. 

Ver. 12. 

" For I have determined there to winter," 
A. V. ; good English, which the Dean alters to 
" for there I have determined to winter " — which 
contains two inaccuracies. (1), It should be, " for 
there have I determined;" and (2), by putting 
"there" before "determined," he makes the 
Apostle say that, when at Mcopolis, he had deter- 
mined to winter — somewhere else. The A. V., 
however, by placing " there " before " to winter," 
determines that the Apostle's intention was to 
winter at Mcopolis, and nowhere else. 

Ver. 13. 

"Bring Zenas — diligently," A.V.; "Forward 
zealously on their journey, Zenas — and Apollos," 
Dr. A. 

Here again does the Dean alter for the worse 
the grammatical English of the A. V., which very 
properly places first "Zeno and Apollos," and 
"their journey" after them; while the Dean 

ON EP. TO TITUS, CII. III. V. 14. 209 

speaks of "their journey," before mentioning 
them. Whose journey is it, then ? It is the 
same inaccurate grammar as above, at ch. i. v. 3, 
p. 189. 

npo7rl/[i7ra> also means both " to send before, to 
forward," and " to accompany ; " also, by impli- 
cation, " to provide the necessary things for a 
journey." Thus airiovra Se rbv Kvpov wpovireiuL- 
irov aTTavregy^ * When Cyrus departed, they all 
accompanied him.' So, also, irpovwifjLireTo ev ra^ei,^ 
— 'he sent on, made to move forward.' The 
question is, therefore, whether Titus was to bring 
them on, by coming with them, or only to pro- 
vide for their wants. In either case, airovSaifjjg is 
better rendered "diligently" or "carefully" than 
" zealously." 

Ver. 14. 

" And let ours also learn to maintain good 
works for necessary uses," A. V. ; " Moreover, let 
our people also learn to practise good works for 
the necessary wants," Dr. A. 

The alteration proposed by the late Professor 
Scholefield, " to profess honest trades," instead of 
"to maintain good works," deserves attention, 
standing, as it does, in connection with " neces- 
sary uses." It certainly is better than " to prac- 
tise good works for the necessary wants." What 
necessary wants ? "The" defines and determines 

» Cyrop. I. iv. 25. ^ Id. V. iii. 53. 



a certain set ; whereas A. V. leaves that open ; 
which is a better and more idiomatic rendering of 
rag avayKa(ag ^pdaCt though the article be found 
in Greek. Xpda also is used by the best authors, 
for both " use ** and for " want/' e. g, by Aristotle 
himself, iv xpdfi uvai,^ " to be in want," and clc 
rac icafl' -qjdpav xpeiac,^ may mean either " daily 
wants" or "daily uses." But rfjv /ulv yap roirwv 
Xpdav paSiwg siSfiang,^ clearly means " thou shalt 
easily perceive the use of these things," while twv 
jULtv yap aXAciiv c3v av iv XP^^? yevtiifieOa means 
"of the other things, of which we may be in 
want." ♦ 

Ver. 15. 

" Greet them that love," A. V. ; " Salute 
them," Dr. A. 

The same word occurs twice in the same 
verse ; wherefore does A. V. give us the Latin 
" salute " once, and the Saxon " greet " also onceP 
This is more agreeable to the ear, and means the 
same thing as " salute," said twice. 

Those few chapters will suffice to show the 
nature of Dr. Alford's work. 

After making allowance for the errors in judg- 
ment or in scholarship, into which I may have 

> Politic, i. 9, 18. » (Econ. ii. 17, 2: 

• Isocr. Orat. I. p. 13, ed. Oxf. * Ibid. Orat. x. p. 293. 


fallen while endeavouring to ward, from the 
Received Text and the Authorised Version, the 
Dean's attacks upon both, there will yet be good 
reason left for thinking that it is not his place 
to despise either ; as well as for wishing that he 
had a deeper knowledge of the Greek text, and 
was thorough master of his mother-tongue, ere he 
attempted to correct the one and to construct the 

A man who, like him, sets to a work of this 
kind, apparently without the slightest hesitation 
or misgiving in his own powers, thinking it the 
easiest thing in the world to make wholesale 
changes in the Greek text and in the joint 
labours of more than fifty learned men of old, 
instead of dealing with the utmost reverence and 
caution, not only forms an unworthy estimate of 
the work he undertakes — but he also recklessly 
wounds the feeling of deep respect and affection 
with which men, nowise his inferiors in judg- 
ment or scholarship, still continue to look upon 
the Received Text and the English Bible. 

Both these have, indeed, lasted more than 
two centuries ; a long time, in truth, for those 
who think that wisdom, learning, and scholarship 
have only just dawned on the land, and that, 
until now, all was darkness and ignorance. 
"Wise men, however, do not think so ; but rather 
take the long life of those two monxmients of 
ancient piety and learning as a proof of their 
real merit and excellence. And while such men 


readily give the Dean of Canterbury full credit 
for his plodding industry, and also for sundry 
useful hints in his renderings — they yet, on the 
whole, confess, that a better acquaintance with 
his work only tends to deepen their reverence 
and to strengthen their affection for their old 
friends and companions, the Received Greek 
Text of the New Testament and the Authorised 
Version of it — Neither of which they ever intend 
to give up ; not even at the Dean's bidding. 


Stramgewats a Waldeh, Printen, 

GasUe St. Leicester Sq. 

/ *^ 


• !■ 



% *